General Language Proficiency Revisited: Current and Future Issues

REFERENCES

• Ackermann, T. (1994). Using multidimensional item response theory to understand what items and tests are measuring. Applied Measurement in Education, 7(4), 255–278.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson, J. C. (1991). Bands and scores. In J. C. Alderson & B. North (Eds.), Language testing in the 1990s (pp. 71–86). London, UK: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson, J. C. (Ed.). (2002). Common European Framework of Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment: Case studies. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson, J. C. (2005). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency. The interface between learning and assessment. London, UK: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson, J. C., Figueras, N., Kuijper, H., Nold, G., Takala, S., & Tardieu, C. (2006). Analysing tests of reading and listening in relation to the common European framework of reference: The experience of the Dutch CEFR construct project. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(1), 3–30.
   Google Scholar
• Alderson, J. C., & Huhta, A. (2011). Can research into the diagnostic testing of reading in a second or foreign language contribute to SLA research? In EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 11, pp. 30–52). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• American Federation of Teachers, National Council on Measurement in Education, & National Education Association. (1990). Standards for teacher competence in educational assessment for students. Retrieved from http://buros.org/standards-teacher-competence-educational-assessment-students
   Google Scholar
• Association of Language Testers in Europe. (2001). ALTE principles of good practice for ALTE examinations. Retrieved from http://alte.columnsdesign.com/setting_standards/code_of_practice
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F., Davidson, F., Ryan, K., & Choi, I. (1995). An investigation into the comparability of two tests of English as a foreign language: The Cambridge–TOEFL comparability study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, K., & Brown, J. D. (1996). Language testing courses: What are they? In A. Cumming & R. Berwick (Eds.), Validation in language testing (pp. 236–256). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Bartning, I., Martin, M., & Vedder, I. (Eds.). (2010). Communicative proficiency and linguistic development. Intersections between SLA and language testing research. EUROSLA Monograph Series (Vol. 1). Available from http://eurosla.org/monographs/EMhome.html.
   Google Scholar
• Bechger, T., Kuijper, H., & Maris, G. (2009). Standard setting in relation to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: The case of the state examination of Dutch as a second language. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(2), 126–150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G., & Van Heerden, J. (2004). The concept of validity. Psychological Review, 111(4), 1061–1071.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brindley, G. (2001). Language assessment and professional development. In C. Elder, A. Brown, K. Hill, N. Iwashita, T. Lumley, T. McNamara, & K. O’Loughlin (Eds.), Experimenting with uncertainty: Essays in honour of Alan Davies (pp. 126–136). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brookhart, S. (2011). Educational assessment knowledge and skills for teachers. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practices, 30(1), 3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J. D., & Bailey, K. (2008). Language testing courses: What are they in 2007? Language Testing, 25(3), 349–383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cambridge ESOL. (n.d.). Teaching Knowledge Test. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgeesol.org/exams/tkt/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
   Google Scholar
• Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1981). A theoretical framework for communicative competence. In A. S. Palmer, P. Groot, & G. Trosper (Eds.), The construct validation of tests of communicative competence (pp. 31–36). Washington, DC: TESOL.
   Google Scholar
• Chapelle, C. A. (2012). Validity argument for language assessment: The framework is simple … . Language Testing, 29(1), 19–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, J. (2011). Language assessment: Its development and future—An Interview with Lyle F. Bachman. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(3), 277–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. (2001). A Common European Framework of Reference for language learning and teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. (2003). Relating language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment (CEF). Manual. Preliminary pilot version. Strasbourg, France: Language Policy Division.
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. (2009a). Reference Supplement to the Manual for Relating Language examinations to the CEFR. Strasbourg, France: Language Policy Division.
   Google Scholar
• Council of Europe. (2009b). Relating language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEF). A manual. Strasbourg, France: Language Policy Division.
   Google Scholar
• Cumming, A. (2009). Language assessment in education: Tests, curricula and teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 90–100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121–129.
   Google Scholar
• Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Cummins, J. (2008). BICS and CALP: Empirical and theoretical status of the distinction. In B. Street & N. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education ( 2nd ed., Vol. 2: Literacy, pp. 71–83). New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
   Google Scholar
• Davies, A. (2012). Kane, validity and soundness. Language Testing, 29(1), 37–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Jong, J., & Zheng, Y. (2011). Applying EALTA Guidelines—A practical case study on Pearson Test of English Academic. Retrieved from http://www.pearsonpte.com/research/Documents/RN_ApplyingEALTAGuidelines_2010.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding language testing. London, UK: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Downey, N., & Kollias, C. (2009). Standard setting for listening, grammar, vocabulary and reading sections of the Advanced Level Certificate in English (ALCE). In N. Figueras & J. Noijons (Eds.), Linking to the CEFR levels: Research perspectives (pp. 125–130). Arnem, the Netherlands: CITO, CoE, EALTA.
   Google Scholar
• Eckes, T. (2012). Examinee-centered standard setting for large-scale assessments: The prototype group method. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, 54(3), 257–283.
   Google Scholar
• Educational Testing Service. (2002). ETS standards for quality and fairness. Princeton, NJ: Author.
   Google Scholar
• European Association for Language Testing and Assessment. (2006). Guidelines for good practice in language testing and assessment. Retrieved from http://www.ealta.eu.org/guidelines.htm
   Google Scholar
• Figueras, N., & Noijons, J. (Eds.). (2009). Linking to the CEFR levels: Research perspectives. Arnem, the Netherlands: CITO, CoE, EALTA.
   Google Scholar
• Figueras, N., North, B., Takala, S., Verhelst, N., & Van Avermaet, P. (2005). Relating examinations to the Common European Framework: A manual. Language Testing, 22(3), 261–279.
   Google Scholar
• Fulcher, G. (2004a, 18 March). Are Europe’s tests being built on an unsafe framework?, Guardian Weekly TEFL Supplement.
   Google Scholar
• Fulcher, G. (2004b). Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(4), 253–266.
   Google Scholar
• Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical language testing. London, UK: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2009). Test architecture, test retrofit. Language Testing, 26(1), 123–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaboniat, M., Perlmann-Balme, M., & Studer, T. (2013). Certificate B1 German Exam for young adults and adults: Standard Setting. A work report. [Zertifikat B1 Deutschprüfung für Jugendliche und Erwachsene: Standard Setting. Ein Arbeitsbericht]. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 18(1), 72–75.
   Google Scholar
• Green, A. (2012). Language functions revisited: Theoretical and empirical bases for language construct definition across the ability range. Cambridge, UK: UCLES/Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harsch, C. (2007). The Common European Framework of Reference: Implications and Limitations. [Der gemeinsame europäische Referenzrahmen für Sprachen. Leistung und Grenzen]. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM. Retrieved from http://www.opus-bayern.de/uni-augsburg/volltexte/2006/368/
   Google Scholar
• Harsch, C., & Hartig, J. (2012, November). Effects of selected item characteristics on difficulty and dimensionality of reading and listening comprehension tests. Paper presented at the Language Testing Forum, Bristol, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Harsch, C., & Martin, G. (2012). Adapting CEF-descriptors for rating purposes: Validation by a combined rater training and scale revision approach. Assessing Writing, 17(4), 228–250.
   Google Scholar
• Harsch, C., Pant, H. A., & Köller, O. (Eds.). (2010). Calibrating standards-based assessment tasks for English as a first foreign language. Standard-setting procedures in Germany. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar
• Hartig, J., & Höhler, J. (2009). Multidimensional IRT models for the assessment of competencies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35(2–3), 57–63.
   Google Scholar
• Hasselgreen, A., Carlsen, S., & Helness, H. (2004). European Survey of Language Testing and Assessment Needs. Report: Part one—General findings. Retrieved from http://www.ealta.eu.org/documents/resources/survey-report-pt1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Huhta, A., Hirvelä, T., & Banerjee, J. (2005). European Survey of Language Testing and Assessment Needs. Report: Part two—Regional findings. Retrieved from http://users.jyu.fi/˜huhta/ENLTA2/First_page.htm
   Google Scholar
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimensions of language proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 663–667.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2010, May). Harmony or conflict? Language activities, linguistic competencies, and intellectual functioning in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Paper presented at the 7th Annual Conference of the European Association for Language Testing and Assessment, The Hague, the Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2011a). Explanations of associations between L1 and L2 literacy skills. In M. S. Schmid & L. Wander (Eds.), Modeling bilingualism (pp. 85–112). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2011b). Language proficiency in native and nonnative speakers: An agenda for research and suggestions for second-language assessment. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(3), 229–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulstijn, J. H., Alderson, J. C., & Schoonen, R. (2010). Developmental stages in second-language acquisition and levels of second-language proficiency: Are there links between them? In I. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development. EUROSLA Monographs Series 1 (pp. 11–20). Available from http://eurosla.org/monographs/EMhome.html
   Google Scholar
• Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269–293). Harmandsworth, UK: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Inbar-Lourie, O. (2008). Constructing a language assessment knowledge base: A focus on language assessment courses. Language Testing, 25(3), 385–402.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• In’nami, Y., & Koizumi, R. (2012). Factor structure of the revised TOEIC® test: A multiple-sample analysis. Language Testing, 29(1), 131–152.
   Google Scholar
• International Language Testing Association. (2007). ILTA guidelines for practice. Retrieved from http://www.iltaonline.com/
   Google Scholar
• Jang, E. (2009). Demystifying a Q-matrix for making diagnostic inferences about L2 reading skills. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(3), 210–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Japan Language Testing Association. (n.d.). JLTA Code of Good Testing Practice. Retrieved from http://www.avis.ne.jp/˜youichi/COP.html
   Google Scholar
• Jin, Y. (2010). The place of language testing and assessment in the professional preparation of foreign language teachers in China. Language Testing, 27(4), 555–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, M. (2001). Current concerns in validity theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38(4), 319–342.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane, M. (2010, April). Validating score interpretations and uses. Paper presented at the 32nd Annual Language Testing Research Colloquium, Cambridge, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Kane, M. (2012). Validating score interpretations and uses. Language Testing, 29(1), 3–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight, M. (2001, November). Workplace English: A benchmarking case study. Hong Kong: Human Resources/Institute of Human Resource Management.
   Google Scholar
• Language Testing Forum. (2011). Panel discussion “Language tests for immigration purposes.” Retrieved from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/al/research/conferences/ltf2011/language_testing_forum_2011_panel_discussion.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Y. W., & Sawaki, Y. (2009). Cognitive diagnosis and Q-matrices in language assessment. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(3), 169–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leung, C. (2004). Developing formative teacher assessment: knowledge, practice and change. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(1), 19–41.
   Google Scholar
• Malone, M. (2008). Training in language assessment. In E. Shohamy (Ed.), Language testing and assessment ( 2nd ed., Vol. 7, pp. 225–240). New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Maris, G., Noijons, J., & Reichard, E. (2009). Benchmarking of videotaped oral performances in terms of the CEFR. In N. Figueras & J. Noijons (Eds.), Linking to the CEFR levels: Research perspectives (pp. 81–85). Arnem, the Netherlands: CITO, CoE, EALTA.
   Google Scholar
• Martyniuk, W. (Ed.). (2010). Aligning tests with the CEFR: Reflections on using the Council of Europe’s draft manual. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• McNamara, T. (2006). Validity in language testing: The challenge of Sam Messick’s legacy. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(1), 31–51.
   Google Scholar
• Mertler, C. (n.d.). Classroom Assessment Literacy Inventory. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/htm/v8n22/cali.htm
   Google Scholar
• Messick, S. A. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement ( 3rd ed., pp. 13–103). Washington DC: The American Council on Education and the National Council on Measurement in Education.
   Google Scholar
• Milton, J. (2010). The development of vocabulary breadth across the CEFR levels. A common basis for the elaboration of language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, examinations, and textbooks across Europe. In I. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development. EUROSLA Monographs Series 1 (pp. 211–232). Available from http://eurosla.org/monographs/EMhome.html
   Google Scholar
• Moe, E. (2009). Jack of more trades? Could standard setting serve several functions?. In N. Figueras & J. Noijons (Eds.), Linking to the CEFR levels: Research perspectives (pp. 131–138). Arnem, the Netherlands: CITO, CoE, EALTA.
   Google Scholar
• Morrow, K. (1981). Communicative language testing: revolution of evolution. In C. J. Alderson & A. Hughes (Eds.), Issues in language testing (pp. 26–37). London, UK: British Council.
   Google Scholar
• Morrow, K. (Ed.). (2004). Insights from the Common European Framework. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Noijons, J., & Kuijper, H. (2006). Mapping the Dutch Foreign Language State Examinations onto the Common European Framework. Arnhem, the Netherlands: Cito.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, J. M. (2005). Book review: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Language Testing, 22(3), 399–405.
   Google Scholar
• North, B. (2000). The development of a Common Framework Scale of Language Proficiency. New York, NY: Lang.
   Google Scholar
• North, B. (2002). Developing descriptor scales of language proficiency for the CEF common reference levels. In J. C. Alderson (Ed.), Common European Framework of Reference for Langauges: Learning, teaching, assessment. Case studies. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.
   Google Scholar
• North, B. (2004, 15 April). Europe’s framework promotes language discussion, not directives. Guardian Weekly.
   Google Scholar
• North, B. (2007). The CEFR Illustrative Descriptor Scales. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 656–659.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• North, B., & Schneider, G. (1998). Scaling descriptors for language proficiency scales. Language Testing, 15(2), 217–263.
   Google Scholar
• Oller, J. (1979). Language tests at school: A pragmatic approach. London, UK: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Oller, J. (1983). A consensus for the eighties? In J. W. J. Oller (Ed.), Issues in language testing research (pp. 351–356). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
   Google Scholar
• Osteen, P. (2010). An introduction to using multidimensional item response theory to assess latent factor structures. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 1(2), 66–82.
   Google Scholar
• Papageorgiou, S. (2007). Relating the Trinity College London GESE and ISE examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference ( Final project report). Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University.
   Google Scholar
• Papageorgiou, S. (2010). Investigating the decision-making process of standard setting participants. Language Testing, 27(2), 261–282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson. (2009). Pearson Academic PTE Score Guide. Retrieved from http://pearsonpte.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PremliminaryEstimatesofConcordanceUS.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, A., & Murray, N. L. (1996). What raters really pay attention to. In M. Milanovic & N. Saville (Eds.), Language Testing 3—Performance, testing, cognition and assessment (pp. 74–91). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Purpura, J. (2008). Assessing communicative language ability: Models and components. In N. Hornberger & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education (Vol. 7, Language Testing and Assessment, pp. 53–68). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Qian, D. (2008). English language assessment in Hong Kong: A survey of practices, developments and issues. Language Testing, 25(1), 85–110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, L., Pallotti, G., & Bettoni, C. (Eds.). (2011). EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 11). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Rupp, A., Vock, M., Harsch, C., & Köller, O. (2008). Developing Standards-based Assessment Tasks for English as a First Foreign Language - Context, Processes and Outcomes in Germany. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
   Google Scholar
• Sawaki, Y., Stricker, L., & Oranje, A. (2009). Factor structure of the TOEFL Internet-based test. Language Testing, 26(1), 5–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawaki, Y., Kim, H. J., & Gentile, C. (2009). Q-Matrix construction: Defining the link between constructs and test items in large-scale reading and listening comprehension assessments. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(3), 190–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider, G., & North, B. (2000). Proficiency in foreign languages: What does it mean? [Fremdsprachen können - was heisst das?] Chur and Zurich, Switzerland: Rüegger. Retrieved from www.slate.eu.org
   Google Scholar
• Spolsky, B. (1995). Prognostication and language aptitude testing—1925–62. Language Testing, 12(3), 321–340.
   Google Scholar
• Spolsky, B. (2008). Introduction: Language testing at 25: Maturity and responsibility? Language Testing, 25(3), 297–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stansfield, C. W. (2008). Lecture: “Where we have been and where we should go.” Language Testing, 25(3), 311–326.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum, R., & Wylie, E. (2008). Linking English language test scores onto the Common European Framework of Reference: An application of standard setting methodology (TOEFL iBT Series Rep. No. TOEFLibt–06, ETS Research Report No. RR-08-34). Princeton, NJ: ETS.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, L. (2009). Developing assessment literacy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 21–36.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, L., & Jones, N. (2006) Cambridge ESOL exams and the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). Research Notes 24 (pp. 2–5). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge ESOL.
   Google Scholar
• Vogt, K. (2009, October). Assessment literacy amongst foreign language teachers - needs and necessities in training and professional development. Paper presented at the DGFF-Congress (German Association of Foreign Language Research), Leipzig, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Watanabe, Y. (2011). Teaching a course in assessment literacy to test takers: Its rationale, procedure, content and effectiveness. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 46, 29–34.
   Google Scholar
• Weir, C. (2005). Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing, 22(3), 281–300.
   Google Scholar
• Weir, C., Chan, S., & Nakatsuhara, F. (2013). Examining the criterion-related validity of the GEPT advanced reading and writing tests: Comparing GEPT with IELTS and real-life academic performance. Retrieved from http://www.lttc.ntu.edu.tw/lttc-gept-grants/RReport/RG01.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Wu, J. R. W., & Wu, R. Y. F. (2010). Relating the GEPT reading comprehension tests to the CEFR. Studies in Language Testing, 33, 204–224.
   Google Scholar