1887
Volume 5, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-109X
  • E-ISSN: 2589-1103
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes
Preview this article:

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ap.00019.roe
2023-02-24
2024-04-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Almeida, S., & Fernando, M.
    (2017) Making the cut: Occupation-specific factors influencing employers in their recruitment and selection of immigrant professionals in the information technology and accounting occupations in regional Australia. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(6), 880–912. 10.1080/09585192.2016.1143861
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1143861 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S.
    (2010) Language assessment in practice. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Canale, M., & Swain, M.
    (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 11, 1–47. 10.1093/applin/1.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/1.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  4. Dai, D. W.
    (2022) Design and validation of an L2-Chinese interactional competence test [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. The University of Melbourne.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ebel, R. L.
    (1964) The social consequences of educational testing. Proceedings of the 1963 invitational conference on testing problems (pp.130–143). Educational Testing Service.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. ETS
    ETS (2010) Linking TOEFL iBT scores to IELTS scores. Educational Testing Service.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Huth, T.
    (2021) Conceptualizing interactional learning targets for the second language curriculum. InS. Kunitz, O. Sert, & N. Markee (Eds.), Emerging issues in classroom discourse and interaction: Theoretical and applied CA perspectives on pedagogy (pp.359–382). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑52193‑6_18
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52193-6_18 [Google Scholar]
  8. Malone, M. E., & Montee, M.
    (2014) Stakeholders’ beliefs about the TOEFL iBT test as a measure of academic language ability. ETS research report No. RR-4-42. Educational Testing Service. 10.1002/ets2.12039
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12039 [Google Scholar]
  9. May, L., Nakatsuhara, F., Lam, D., & Galaczi, E.
    (2020) Developing tools for learning oriented assessment of interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. Language Testing, 37(2), 165–188. 10.1177/0265532219879044
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532219879044 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ockey, G. J., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E.
    (2021) Human versus computer partner in the paired oral discussion test. Applied Linguistics, 1–21. 10.1093/applin/amaa067
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amaa067 [Google Scholar]
  11. OET [Google Scholar]
  12. O’Hagan, S., Pill, J., & Zhang, Y.
    (2016) Extending the scope of speaking assessment criteria in a specific-purpose language test: Operationalizing a health professional perspective. Language Testing, 33(2), 195–216. 10.1177/0265532215607920
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215607920 [Google Scholar]
  13. Oxford University Press
    Oxford University Press (2018) Wide Angle. Oxford
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Pekarek Doehler, S.
    (2019) On the nature and the development of L2 interactional competence: State of the art and implications for praxis. InM. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice (pp.25–59). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315177021‑2
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315177021-2 [Google Scholar]
  15. Pill, J.
    (2016) Drawing on indigenous criteria for more authentic assessment in a specific-purpose language test: Health professionals interacting with patients. Language Testing, 33(2), 175–193. 10.1177/0265532215607400
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215607400 [Google Scholar]
  16. Roever, C.
    (2022) Teaching and testing second language pragmatics and interaction: A practical guide. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Roever, C., & Dai, W.
    (2021) Interactional competence and language testing. InM. R. Salaberry & R. Burch (Eds.), Assessing speaking (pp.23–49). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.21832/9781788923828‑003
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788923828-003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Roever, C. & Ikeda, N.
    (2022) What scores from monologic speaking tests can(not) tell us about interactional competence. Language Testing, 39(1), 7–29. 10.1177/02655322211003332
    https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322211003332 [Google Scholar]
  19. Roever, C., & Kasper, G.
    (2018) Speaking in turns and sequences: Interactional competence as a target construct in testing speaking. Language Testing, 35(3), 331–355. 10.1177/0265532218758128
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532218758128 [Google Scholar]
  20. Salaberry, R., & Burch, R.
    (Eds.) (2021) Assessing speaking in context: Expanding the construct and its applications. Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Sato, T., & McNamara, T.
    (2019) What counts in second language oral communication ability? The perspective of linguistic laypersons. Applied Linguistics, 40(6), 894–916. 10.1093/applin/amy032
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy032 [Google Scholar]
  22. Stivers, T.
    (2015) Coding social interaction: A heretical approach in conversation analysis?Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48(1), 1–19. 10.1080/08351813.2015.993837
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2015.993837 [Google Scholar]
  23. Youn, S., & Burch, R.
    (Eds) (2020) Where conversation analysis meets language assessment [Special issue], Papers in Language Testing and Assessment, 9(1).
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Zechner, K., & Evanini, K.
    (Eds.) (2020) Automated speaking assessment: Using language technologies to score spontaneous speech. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ap.00019.roe
Loading
  • Article Type: Discussion
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error