Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The inclusion of planning time in semi-direct oral interaction tests adds consider ably to the overall length of the test, and it is important to be clear that the increase in length is justified by the language outcome. Previous research has shown that the effect of planning time in second language can differentially influence the resultant discourse with planned discourse eliciting more complex language on a range of measures. However, where planning time has been provided it has gener ally been a substantial amount of time (ten minutes or more), and in a second language classroom situation, rather than a testing situation. Where planning time is provided in an oral interaction test it is generally limited to one or two minutes. In this study planning time was manipulated as a variable in a trial administration of a semi-direct test. Discourse analytic techniques were then used to determine the nature and/or significance of differences in the elicited discourse across the two conditions in terms of complexity and accuracy. In addition, candidates were divided into high-proficiency versus low-proficiency groups. The findings suggest that for the high-proficiency candidates, planning time may improve accuracy on some measures where the cognitive load of the task is high, but that this effect does not extend to the low-proficiency candidates.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bachman, L. 1990: Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Berman, R. , Slobin, D.I. , Bamberg, M. , Dromi, E. , Marchman, V. , Renner, T. and Sebastian, E. 1986: Coding manual: temporality in discourse (revised edn) . University of Berkeley.

Canale, M. and Swain, M. 1980: Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1, 1-47.

Crookes, G. 1989: Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11, 367-83.

Douglas, D. 1994: Quantity and quality in speaking test performance. Language Testing 11, 125-44.

Ellis, R. 1987: Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9, 1-20.

Faerch, C. and Kasper, G. 1983: Strategies in interlanguage communication. London: Longman.

Hulstijn, J. and Hulstijn, W. 1984: Grammatical errors as a function of processing constraints and explicit knowledge. Language Learning 34, 23-43.

Linacre, J.M. 1990: FACETS Computer program for many faceted Rasch measurement . Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.

10.

— 1992: A user's guide to Facets. Chicago, IL: Mesa Press.

11.

Ochs, E. 1979: Planned and unplanned discourse. In Givon, T. , editor, Syntax and semantics 12: discourse and syntax, New York: Academic Press, 51-80.

12.

O'Loughlin, K. 1995: Lexical density in candidate output on direct and semi-direct versions of an oral proficiency test. Language Testing 12, 217-37.

13.

Ortega, L. 1995: The effect of planning in L2 Spanish narratives (Research Note 15). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

14.

Riggenbach, H. 1989: Nonnative fluency in dialogue versus monologue speech: a microanalytic approach. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.

15.

Skehan, P. 1995: Analysability, accessibility, and ability for use. In Cook, G. and Seidlhofer, B. , editors, Principle and practice in applied linguistics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

16.

Tannen, D. 1982: Oral and literate strategies in speech and written narratives . Language 58, 1-21.

17.

Tarone, E. 1983: On the variability of interlanguage systems. Applied Linguistics 4, 142-63.

18.

— 1985: Variability in interlanguage use: a study of style shifting in morphology and syntax. Language Learning 35, 373-403.

19.

Wigglesworth, G. 1995: The effect of planning time on oral test discourse. Paper presented at the 17th Language Testing research colloquium , Baltimore, MD.

An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References