AldersonJ. C. (1996). Do corpora have a role in language assessment? In ThomasJ.ShortM. (Eds.), Using corpora for language research: Studies in the honour of Geoffrey Leech (pp. 248–259). London: Longman.
2.
BachmanL. F.PalmerA. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.
BachmanL. F.PalmerA. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
BarkerF. (2010). How can corpora be used in language testing? In O’KeeffeA.McCarthyM. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 633–645). London: Routledge.
5.
BarkerF. (2014). Using corpora to design assessment. In KunnanA. J. (Ed.), The companion to language assessment (pp. 1013–1028). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
6.
BiberD. (1991). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7.
BiberD. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers (Vol. 23). John Benjamins.
8.
BiberD.ConradS.ReppenR.ByrdP.HeltM.ClarkV.CortesV.CsomayE.UrzuaA. (2004). Representing language use in the university: Analysis of the TOEFL 2000 Spoken and Written Academic Language Corpus. Test of English as a Foreign Language. ETS Research Report RM-04–03.
9.
BiberD.GrayB. (2013). Discourse characteristics of writing and speaking task types on the TOEFL iBT® test: A lexico-grammatical analysis. ETS Research Report Series, 2013(1).
10.
ChapelleC. A.EnrightM. K.JamiesonJ. M. (Eds.). (2008). Building a validity argument for the Test of English as a Foreign LanguageTM. London: Routledge.
11.
DaviesM. (2008–) The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 520 million words, 1990–present. Available online at http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/.
12.
EnrightM. K.QuinlanT. (2010). Complementing human judgment of essays written by English language learners with e-rater® scoring. Language Testing, 27(3), 314–334.
13.
FulcherG. (1996). Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing, 13(2), 208–238.
14.
GibsonE.PiantadosiS.FedorenkoK. (2011). Using Mechanical Turk to obtain and analyze English acceptability judgments. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(8), 509–524.
15.
GraesserA. C.McNamaraD. S.LouwerseM. M.CaiZ. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 36(2), 193–202.
16.
GrangerS.DagneauxE.MeunierF.PaquotM. (2009). The International Corpus of Learner English. Handbook and CD-ROM. Version 2. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.
17.
HeilmanM.SmithN. A. (2010, June). Rating computer-generated questions with Mechanical Turk. In Proceedings of the NAACL HLT 2010 Workshop on Creating Speech and Language Data with Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (pp. 35–40). Association for Computational Linguistics.
18.
KaneM. (2006). Content-related validity evidence in test development. In DowningS. M.HaladynaT.M. (Eds.), Handbook of test development (pp. 131–153). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19.
KaneM. (2013). Validity and fairness in the testing of individuals. In ChatterjiM. (Ed.), Validity and Test Use: An International Dialogue on Educational Assessment, Accountability and Equity (pp. 17–53). Bingley, UK: Emerald Groupshing.
20.
LadoR. (1961). Language testing: The construction and use of foreign language tests. A teacher’s book. London: Longman.
21.
LuX. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474–496.
22.
McNamaraD. S.GraesserA. C. (2012). Coh-Metrix: An automated tool for theoretical and applied natural language processing. In McCarthyP. M.BoonthumC. (Eds.), Applied natural language processing: Identification, investigation and resolution (pp. 188–205). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
23.
NorthB.SchneiderG. (1998). Scaling descriptors for language proficiency scales. Language Testing, 15(2), 217–262.
24.
ParkK. (2014). Corpora and language assessment: The state of the art. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(1), 27–44.
25.
SimpsonR. C.LeeD. W.LeicherS. (2002). MICASE manual. The Michigan Corpus of Academic English. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan.
26.
StubbsM.HalbeD.2012. Corpus linguistics: Overview. In ChapelleC. A. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1377–1379). Oxford: Blackwell.
27.
WeigleS. C.GoodwinS. (2016). Applications of corpus linguistics in language assessment. In BanerjeeJ.TsagariD. (Eds.). Contemporary second language assessment (pp. 209–223). London: Bloomsbury Academic.