Abstracts
Résumé
À son émergence, le domaine de l’évaluation des langues focalise sur l’apprentissage de l’anglais chez les adultes. Aujourd’hui, une vision élargie s’impose où la frontière entre langue maternelle et langue seconde finit par s’estomper et où la diversité des apprenants est prise en considération. En suivant cette évolution, six grands enjeux se dégagent, autour desquels existe une abondante littérature : 1) la nature de la compétence langagière et ses composantes, 2) les défis de la recherche de l’authenticité, 3) la complexité du processus de validation, 4) les considérations éthiques qui devraient guider les concepteurs et les utilisateurs, 5) les attentes sociales liées à l’évaluation des langues et, 6) les voies qu’ouvre l’utilisation des technologies pour évaluer les compétences langagières. Cette analyse montre que le domaine peut être examiné d’une perspective psychométrique, linguistique, pédagogique ou sociale.
Mots-clés :
- évaluation de la langue,
- compétence langagière,
- authenticité,
- validation,
- éthique,
- aspects sociaux,
- technologie
Abstract
While emerging, the field of language assessment focused on adults learning English. We now observe an enlarged vision that blurs the distinction between first and second languages and considers learners diversity. Tracking this evolution, six major issues can be identified, each one represented by an abundant literature: 1) the nature of language competence and its components, 2) the challenges of the need for authenticity, 3) the complexity of the validation process, 4) the ethical considerations to guide the designers and users, 5) social expectations linked to language evaluation and, 6) the promises of technology applications for language assessment. As a result of this analysis, it appears that the field can be examined from several perspectives – psychometric, linguistic, pedagogical, and social.
Keywords:
- language assessment,
- language competence,
- authenticity,
- validation,
- ethics,
- social aspects,
- technology
Resumo
À medida que foi emergindo, o campo da avaliação linguística concentrou-se na aprendizagem de inglês em adultos. Hoje, vemos impor-se uma visão mais ampla onde a fronteira entre língua materna e segunda língua acaba por se esvair e onde a diversidade dos aprendentes é levada em consideração. Ao acompanhar esta evolução, podemos identificar seis grandes questões em torno das quais encontramos uma literatura abundante: a natureza da competência linguística e seus componentes, os desafios da busca pela autenticidade, a complexidade do processo de validação, as considerações éticas que devem orientar os concetores e os utilizadores, as expectativas sociais relacionadas à avaliação linguística e, em última análise, os caminhos abertos pelo uso da tecnologia para avaliar as competências linguísticas. A partir desta análise, percebe-se que o domínio pode ser examinado sob uma perspetiva psicométrica, linguística, pedagógica ou social.
Palavras chaves:
- Avaliação linguística,
- competência linguística,
- autenticidade,
- validação,
- ética,
- aspetos sociais,
- tecnologia
Appendices
Liste des références
- Abrami, P., Borohkovski, E., & Lysenko, L. (2015). The effects of ABRACADABRA on reading outcomes : A meta-analysis of applied field research. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 26(4), 337-367. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/147396/.
- Alderson, C. J. (1980). Native and non-native speaker performance on Cloze tests. Language Learning, 30(1), 59-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1980.tb00151.x
- Anastasi, A. (1986). Evolving concepts of test validation. Annual Review of Psychology, 37, 115. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.ps.37.020186.000245
- Aryadoust, V. (2013). Building a validity argument for a listening test of academic proficiency. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
- Aryadoust, V., Eckes, T., & In’nami Y. (2021) Editorial : Frontiers in language assessment and testing. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 1944. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.691614
- Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
- Bachman, L. F. (2005) Building and supporting a case for test use. Language Assessment Quarterly, 2(1), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0201_1
- Blais, J. G., & Laurier M. (1995). The dimensionality of a placement test from several analytical perspectives. Language Testing, 12(1), 72-98. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229501200105
- Bonniol J.-J., & Vial, M. (1997). Les modèles de l’évaluation. De Boeck Université.
- Brown, J. D. (1997). Computers in language testing : Present research and some future directions. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 4459. http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/brown/default.html
- Canale, M., & Swain, M. (l980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1
- Carroll, B. J. (1980). Testing communicative performance. Pergamon.
- Carroll, J. B. (1983) Psychometric theory and language testing. Dans J. W. Jr Oller (dir.), Issues in language testing research (p. 80-107). Newbury House.
- Carver, R. P. (1974). Two dimensions of tests : Psychometric and edumetric. American Psychologist, 29(7), 512–518. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036782
- Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2010). Technology in standardized language assessments. Dans R. Kaplan (dir.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (2e éd., p. 511-526). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195384253.013.0035
- Chapelle, C. A., & Chung, Y. R. (2010). The promise of NLP and speech processing technologies in language assessment. Language Testing, 27(3), 301-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210364405
- Chapelle, C. A., & Douglas, D. (2006). Assessing language through computer technology. Cambridge University Press.
- Chapelle, C. A., & Voss, E. (2016). 20 years of technology and language assessment in Language Learning & Technology. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 116-128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210364405
- Cheng, L., & Curtis, A. (2004). Washback or backwash : A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. Dans L. Cheng, Y. L. Wabanabe et A. Curtis (dir.), Washback in language testing : Research contexts and methods (p. 3-17). Laurence Earlbaum Associate.
- Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. The MIT Press.
- Cizek, G. J. (2012). Defining and distinguishing validity : Interpretations of score meaning and justifications of test use. Psychological Methods, 17(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026975
- Cook, D. A., Brydges, R., Ginsburg, S., & Hatala, R. (2015). A contemporary approach to validity arguments : A practical guide to Kane’s framework. Medical Education, 49, 560575. https://doi.org//10.1111/medu.12678
- Fouly, K. A., Bachman. L. F., & Cziko, G. A. (1990). The divisibility of language competence : A confirmatory approach. Language Learning, 40(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00952.x
- Fulcher, G. (2011). Cheating gives life to our test dependence. The Guardian Weekly, 14 octobre. http://languagetesting.info/articles/store/cheating.pdf
- Germain, C. (1993). Évolution de l’enseignement des langues : 5 000 ans d’histoire. CLE international.
- Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 40(2), 97-118. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004144
- Glaser, R. (1963). Instructional technology and the measurement of learning outcomes. American Psychologist, 18(8), 519–522. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0049294
- Hamp-Lyons, L. (1997). Washback, impact and validity : Ethical concerns. Language Testing, 14(3), 295-303. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229701400306
- Hanania, E., & Shikhani, M. (1986). Interrelationships among three tests of language proficiency. TESOL Quaterly, 20(1), 97-109. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586391
- Hulstijn, J. H. (1985). Second Language proficiency : an interactive approach. Dans K. Hyntenstan et M. Pienemann (dir.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (p. 373-380). Multilingual Matters.
- Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in Sociolinguistics : An ethnographic approach. University of Pennsylvania Press.
- International Language Testing Association. (2000). Code of ethics for ITLA. http://www.iltaonline.com/code.pdf
- International Language Testing Association. (2007). ILTA guidelines for practice. https://www.iltaonline.com/page/ILTAGuidelinesforPractice
- Isbell, D. R., & Kremmel B. (2020). Test review : Current options in at-home language proficiency tests for making high-stakes decisions. Language Testing, 37(4), 600-619. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220943483
- Kane, M. (2006). Validation. Dans R. Brennan (dir.), Educational measurement (4e éd., p. 1764). American Council of Education/Praeger.
- Kane, M. (2012). Validating score interpretations and uses. Language Testing, 29(1), 317. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211417210
- Klinger, D. A., McDivitt, P. R., Howard, B. B., Munoz, M. A., Rogers, W. T., & Wylie, E. C. (2015). The classroom assessment standards for PreK-12 teachers. Kindle Direct Press.
- Knoch, U., & Chapelle, C. A. (2018). Validation of rating processes within an argument-based framework. Language Testing, 35(4), 477-499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217710049
- Koh, K. (2014). Authentic assessment, teacher judgment and moderation in a context of high accountability. Dans C. Wyatt-Smith, V., Klenowski et P. Colbert (dir.), Designing assessment for quality learning (vol. 1, p. 249-264). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5902-2_16
- Lado, R. (1961). Language Testing : The construction and use of foreign language tests. Longmans.
- Laurier M. (1992) L’application des techniques de tests adaptatifs en français langue seconde. Dans Sauvé L. (dir.), La technologie éducative d’hier à demain (p. 109-118). CIPTE/Télé-Université.
- Laurier M. (1999). The development of an adaptive test for placement in French. Dans M. Chalhoub-Deville (dir.), Issues in computer-adaptive testing of reading proficiency (p. 122-135). Cambridge University Press.
- Laurier M., & Baker, B. (2015). The certification of teachers’ language competence in Quebec in French and English : Two different perspectives ? Language Assessment Quarterly, 12(1), 10-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.979349
- Laurier M., Lussier, D., & Riel-Salvatore, H. (2021). The development of linguistic profiles and online tests for Quebec health professionals working in English. Dans N. Saville (dir.), Collated papers for the ALTE 7th International Conference (p. 171-174). Association of Language Testers in Europe. https://alte.org/resources/Documents/ALTE%207th%20International%20Conference%20Madrid%20June%202021.pdf
- Legendre, R. (2000). Dictionnaire actuel de l’éducation (2e éd.). Guérin.
- Loye, N. (2018). Et si la validation était plus qu’une suite de procédures techniques ? Mesure et évaluation en éducation, 41(1), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.7202/1055898ar
- McNamara, T. (2006). Validity in language testing : The challenge of Sam Messick’s legacy. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(1), 31-51. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0301_3
- McNamara. T., & Roever C. (2006). Language testing : The social dimension. Blackwell.
- Mehrens, W. A. (1997). The consequences of consequential validity. Educational Measurement : Issues and Practice, 16(2), 16-18.
- Messick, S. (1980). Test validity and the ethics of assessment. American Psychologist, 35(11), 1012–1027. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.11.1012
- Messick, S. (1989). Validity. Dans R. L. Linn (dir.), Educational measurement (3e éd., p. 13-104). American Council of Education/Macmillan.
- Milliner B., & Barr B. (2020). Computer-assisted language testing and learner behavior. Dans M. Freiermuth et N. Zarrinabadi (dir.), Technology and the psychology of second language learners and users. New language learning and teaching environments. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34212-8_5
- Moss, P. A. (1992). Shifting conceptions of validity in educational measurement : Implications for performance assessment. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 229-258. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062003229
- Nevo, N. (1989). Test-taking strategies on a multiple-choice test of reading comprehension. Language Testing, 6(2), 199-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553228900600206
- Oller, J. W. Jr (1979). Language tests at school. Longman.
- Papageorgiou, S., & Venessa F. M. (2021) Maintaining access to a large-scale test of academic language proficiency during the pandemic : The launch of TOEFL iBT Home Edition. Language Assessment Quarterly, 18(1), 36-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2020.1864376
- Phakiti, A., & Isaacs, T. (2021). Classroom assessment and validity : Psychometric and edumetric approaches. EuropeanJournal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 10(1), 3-24.
- Scallon, G. (2000). L’évaluation formative. Éditions du Renouveau pédagogique.
- Schissel, J. L., Leung, C., & Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2019). The construct of multilingualism in language testing. Language Assessment Quarterly, 16(4-5), 373-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1680679
- Scholz, G., Hendricks, D., Spurling, R., Johnson, M., & Vandenberg, L. (1980). Is language ability divisible or unitary ? A factor analysis of 22 English language proficiency tests. Dans J. W. Jr Oller et K. Perkins (dir.), Research in language testing (p. 24-33). Newbury House.
- Shepard, L. A. (1993). Evaluating test validity. Review of research in education, 19(1), 405-450. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X019001405
- Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests : A critical perspective on the uses of language tests (1re éd.). Routledge.
- Simon, M. (2011). La qualité d’un instrument d’évaluation de la littératie. Dans M. J. Berger et A. Desrochers (dir.), L’évaluation de la littératie (p. 287-314). Les Presses de l’Université d’Ottawa.
- Spolsky, B. (1995). Measured words : The development of objective language testing. Oxford University Press.
- Suvorov, R., & Hegelheimer, V. (2013). Computer-assisted language testing. Dans A. J. Kunnan (dir.), The companion to language assessment, 2, 594-613. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118411360.wbcla083
- Tardif, J. (2006). L’évaluation des compétences : Documenter le parcours de développement. Chenelière Éducation.
- Thomas, N., & Osment, C. (2020). Building on Dewaele’s (2018) L1 versus LX dichotomy : The Language-Usage-Identity state model. Applied Linguistics, 41(6), 1005-1010. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz010
- Viswanathan, U., Lebel, M. E., & Barysevich, A. (2018). Un dispositif pour promouvoir et soutenir l’authenticité des interactions en classe de langue seconde. Nouvelle Revue Synergies Canada, 11. https://doi.org/10.21083/nrsc.v0i11.3997
- Wall, D., & Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback : the Sri Lankan impact study. Language testing, 10(1), 41-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229301000103
- Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford University Press.
- Wiggins, G. (1998). Educational assessment : Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. John Wiley.
- Youn, S. J. (2015). Validity argument for assessing L2 pragmatics in interaction using mixed methods. Language Testing, 32(2), 199-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214557113
- Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three generations of DIF analyses : Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4(2), 223-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300701375832
10.7202/1055898ar