["Recent years", Spolsky writes, "have marked the triumph of functional, communicative tests...but there remain basic problems." This article focuses on one of these problems: the 'submersion of individual identities' in overall rating scales and goals for foreign language instruction.]
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages1982: ACTFL provisional proficiency guidelines Hastings-on-Hudson, New York: ACTFL.
2.
Carroll, J.B.1961: Fundamental considerations in testing for English language proficiency of foreign students In Center for Applied Linguistics, Testing, Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
3.
— 1967: The foreign language proficiency attained by language majors near graduation from collegeForeign Language Annals1, 131-51.
4.
Clark, J.L.D.1978: Direct testing of speaking proficiency: theory and practicePrinceton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.
5.
Henning, G. , Hudson, T. and Turner , J.1985: Item response theory and the assumption of unidimensionality for language testsLanguage Testing2, 141-54.
6.
Jackendoff, R.1983: Semantics and CognitionCambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
7.
Lado, R.1961: Language testing: the construction and use of foreign language testsLondon: Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd.
8.
Lantolf, J.P. and Frawley, W.1985: Oral proficiency testing: a critical analysisModern Language Journal69, 337-45.
9.
Lewis, E.G.1980: Bilingualism and bilingual education: a comparative studyAlbuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
10.
Liskin-Gasparro, J.E.1984a: The ACTFL proficiency guidelines: an historical perspective In Higgs, T.V., editor, Teaching for proficiency, the organizing principle. ACTFL Foreign Language Education Series 15, Lincolnwood, Illinois: National Textbook Co.
11.
— 1984b : The ACTFL proficiency guidelines: gateway to testing and curriculumForeign Language Annals17, 475-89.
12.
Schauber, E. and Spolsky, E.1986: The bounds of interpretation: linguistic theory and literary textStanford: Stanford University Press.
13.
Shohamy, E.1983: The stability of the oral proficiency trait on the oral interview speaking testLanguage Learning33, 161-71.
14.
Shohamy, E. and Reves, T.1985. Authentic language tests: where from and where to?Language Testing2, 48-59.
15.
Sollenberger, H.E.1979: Development and current use of the FSI Oral Interview Test In Clark, J.L.D., editor, Direct testing of speaking proficiency: theory and practice.Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service.
16.
Spolsky, B.1981: Some ethical questions about language testing In Klein-Braley, C. and Stevenson, D.K., editors, Practice and Problems in Language Testing, Frankfurt am Main; Verlag Peter D. Lang.
17.
— 1985a : The limits of authenticity in language testsLanguage Testing2, 31-40.
18.
— 1985b : What does it mean to know how to use a language? An essay on the theoretical basis of language testingLanguage Testing2, 180-91.
19.
— 1985c : Jewish multilingualism in the first century: an essay in historical sociolinguistics In Fishman, J.A., editor, Readings in the Sociology of Jewish Languages.Leiden: E.J. Brill.
20.
— 1985d : Formulating a theory of second language learningStudies in Second Language Acquisition7, 269-88.
21.
Stevenson, D.K.1985: Authenticity, validity and a tea partyLanguage Testing2, 41-47.
22.
Wagner, D.A. and Lotfi, A.1983: Learning to read by 'rote'International Journal of the Sociology of Language42, 111-21.
23.
Wilds, C.1975: The oral interview test In Jones, R.L. and Spolsky, B., editors, Testing language proficiency, Arlington, Virginia: Center for Applied Linguistics.
24.
Woods, A. and Baker, R.1985: Item response theoryLanguage Testing2, 119-40.
