CURRENT ISSUES IN LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT AND LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT RESEARCH AND ITS IMPLICATION
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published:
Oct 17, 2024
Abstract
Language is an abstract phenomenon, making its assessment inherently complex. This complexity is amplified by the increasing global demands for high proficiency in language abilities and the accountability pressures placed on language educators. This paper explores the multifaceted challenges in the field of language assessment in the 21st century, highlighting issues such as the need for effective classroom assessments, the training of language teachers, and the reliability and validity of teacher-based assessments. Additionally, it addresses emerging challenges due to globalization and the accountability of educational institutions in preparing students for multilingual workplaces.
How to Cite
Iskandarova, G. (2024). CURRENT ISSUES IN LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT AND LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT RESEARCH AND ITS IMPLICATION. Baltic Journal of Legal and Social Sciences, (3), 228-231. https://doi.org/10.30525/2592-8813-2024-3-24
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
assessment, research, current issues, globalization, challenges
References
1. Berry, V. (1997, March). Gender and personality as factors of interlocutor variability in oral performance tests. Paper presented at the 19th Language Testing Research Colloquium, Orlando, Florida.
2. Blackledge, A. (2009). “As a country we do expect”: The further expansion of language testing regimes in the United Kingdom. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 6–16.
3. Brindley, G. (1998). Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning pro-grammes. Language Testing, 15, 45–85.
4. Brindley, G. (Ed.). (2007). Special issue on language assessment in schools. Language Assess-ment Quarterly, 4(1).
5. Brown, J. D., & Bailey, K. M. (2008). Language testing courses: What are they in 2007? Language Testing, 25(3), 349–83.
6. Carroll, B. J. (1991). Response to Don Porter’s paper: “Affective factors in language testing.” In J. C. Alderson & B. North (Eds.), Language testing in the 1990s: The communicative legacy (pp. 41–45). London: Modern English Publications/British Council.
7. Clapham, C. (2000). Assessment and testing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 147–161.
8. de Jong, J. H. A. L., Lennig, M., Kerkhoff, A., & Poelmans, P. (2009). Development of a test of spoken Dutch for prospective immigrants. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 41–60.
9. Eades, D. (2009). Testing the claims of asylum seekers: The role of language analysis. Lan-guage Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 30–40.
10. Kunnan, A. J. (2009). Testing for citizenship: The US naturalization test. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 89–97.
11. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 49–72.
12. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33.
13. Leung, C. (2004a). Classroom teacher-based assessment of second language development: Construct as practice. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language learning and teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Leung, C. (2004b). Developing formative teacher-based assessment: Knowledge, practice, and change. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 19–41.
15. Leung, C., & Mohan, B. (2004). Teacher formative assessment and talk in classroom con-texts: Assessment as discourse and assessment of discourse. Language Testing, 21(3), 335–59.
16. Leung, C., & Rea-Dickins, P. (2007). Teacher assessment as policy instrument: Contradic-tions and capacities. Language Testing, 4(1), 6–36.
17. Leung, C. (2007). Dynamic assessment: Assessment as teaching? Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 257–278.
18. McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. London: Longman.
19. O’Sullivan, B. (2002). Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance. Language Testing, 19, 277–295.
20. Rea-Dickins, P. (Ed.). (2000). Assessing young learners (Special issue). Language Testing, 1.
21. Rea-Dickins, P. (Ed.). (2004). Exploring diversity in teacher assessment (Special issue). Language Testing, 21(3).
22. Rea-Dickins, P. (2007). Classroom-based assessment: Possibilities and pitfalls. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), The international handbook of English language teaching, Vol. 1. (pp. 505–520). Norwell, MA: Springer.
23. Shohamy, E. (2009). Language tests for immigrants: Why language? Why tests? Why citi-zenship? In G. Hogan-Brun, C. Mar-Molinero & P. Stevenson (Eds.), Discourses on langauge and integration: Critical perspectives on language testing regimes in Europe (pp. 61–82). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
24. Shohamy, E., & McNamara, T. (Eds.). (2009a). Language tests for citizenship, immigration, and asylum (Special issue). Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1).
25. Shohamy, E., & McNamara, T. (2009b). Editorial. In E. Shohamy & T. McNamara (Eds.), Language tests for citizenship, immigration, and asylum (Special issue). Language Assess-ment Quarterly, 6(1), 1–5.
26. Teasdale, A., & Leung, C. (2000). Teacher-based assessment and psychometric theory: A case of paradigm crossing? Language Testing, 17, 163–184.
2. Blackledge, A. (2009). “As a country we do expect”: The further expansion of language testing regimes in the United Kingdom. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 6–16.
3. Brindley, G. (1998). Outcomes-based assessment and reporting in language learning pro-grammes. Language Testing, 15, 45–85.
4. Brindley, G. (Ed.). (2007). Special issue on language assessment in schools. Language Assess-ment Quarterly, 4(1).
5. Brown, J. D., & Bailey, K. M. (2008). Language testing courses: What are they in 2007? Language Testing, 25(3), 349–83.
6. Carroll, B. J. (1991). Response to Don Porter’s paper: “Affective factors in language testing.” In J. C. Alderson & B. North (Eds.), Language testing in the 1990s: The communicative legacy (pp. 41–45). London: Modern English Publications/British Council.
7. Clapham, C. (2000). Assessment and testing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 147–161.
8. de Jong, J. H. A. L., Lennig, M., Kerkhoff, A., & Poelmans, P. (2009). Development of a test of spoken Dutch for prospective immigrants. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 41–60.
9. Eades, D. (2009). Testing the claims of asylum seekers: The role of language analysis. Lan-guage Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 30–40.
10. Kunnan, A. J. (2009). Testing for citizenship: The US naturalization test. Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1), 89–97.
11. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2004). Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into the future. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 49–72.
12. Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2011). Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching Research, 15(1), 11–33.
13. Leung, C. (2004a). Classroom teacher-based assessment of second language development: Construct as practice. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language learning and teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Leung, C. (2004b). Developing formative teacher-based assessment: Knowledge, practice, and change. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 19–41.
15. Leung, C., & Mohan, B. (2004). Teacher formative assessment and talk in classroom con-texts: Assessment as discourse and assessment of discourse. Language Testing, 21(3), 335–59.
16. Leung, C., & Rea-Dickins, P. (2007). Teacher assessment as policy instrument: Contradic-tions and capacities. Language Testing, 4(1), 6–36.
17. Leung, C. (2007). Dynamic assessment: Assessment as teaching? Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 257–278.
18. McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. London: Longman.
19. O’Sullivan, B. (2002). Learner acquaintanceship and oral proficiency test pair-task performance. Language Testing, 19, 277–295.
20. Rea-Dickins, P. (Ed.). (2000). Assessing young learners (Special issue). Language Testing, 1.
21. Rea-Dickins, P. (Ed.). (2004). Exploring diversity in teacher assessment (Special issue). Language Testing, 21(3).
22. Rea-Dickins, P. (2007). Classroom-based assessment: Possibilities and pitfalls. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), The international handbook of English language teaching, Vol. 1. (pp. 505–520). Norwell, MA: Springer.
23. Shohamy, E. (2009). Language tests for immigrants: Why language? Why tests? Why citi-zenship? In G. Hogan-Brun, C. Mar-Molinero & P. Stevenson (Eds.), Discourses on langauge and integration: Critical perspectives on language testing regimes in Europe (pp. 61–82). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
24. Shohamy, E., & McNamara, T. (Eds.). (2009a). Language tests for citizenship, immigration, and asylum (Special issue). Language Assessment Quarterly, 6(1).
25. Shohamy, E., & McNamara, T. (2009b). Editorial. In E. Shohamy & T. McNamara (Eds.), Language tests for citizenship, immigration, and asylum (Special issue). Language Assess-ment Quarterly, 6(1), 1–5.
26. Teasdale, A., & Leung, C. (2000). Teacher-based assessment and psychometric theory: A case of paradigm crossing? Language Testing, 17, 163–184.