1. Representative tasks
• Specify all possible content
• Include a representative sample of the specified content when set...
 Content of the Cambridge CCSE Test Oral Interaction
 Operation content specification.
 Expressing: like, dislike
 Di...
Skills:
 Informational skills
 Provide personal information
 Give instructions
 Apologise
 Complain
 Interactional ...
Types of text
 Presentation (monologue)
 Discussion
 Conversation
 Interview
Other speakers (addresses)
 Equal or hig...
1. Candidate talks with teacher from their own
institution. AIM elicit describing, explaining
and justifying.
2. Candidat...
There are three general formats
1. Format 1 interview
 The most common format
 1 serious drawback the candidate speaks ...
Pictures useful for descriptions
Role play AIM elicit natural languageExample:
 A friend invites you to a party on an...
2. Format 2 Interaction with fellow candidates
 Advantage elicits language that is appropriate to exchanges
between equa...
3. Format 3 Responses to audio- or video- recordings
Use of the same computer generated or audio/video
recorded stimuli.
...
1. Timing  make the oral test as long as is feasible.
2. Plan the test.
3. Give the student many ways of being assessed.
...
Example of planning an oral test
TEST’S STAGES
1. Background and over view
2.Assignig candidates to levels
3. Conducting interviews
4. Assessment
 Examples: 1, 2
ACCURACY Pronunciation
APPROPRIACY The use of language
RANGE Vocabulary, language available to the
candid...
 great care must be taken into account to ignore personal qualities of the candidates.
Assessing group oral presentation.
Methodology and Resources for English
Teaching.
Craeted by students.
Rubric.
• Assessing oral abilities is not easy.
• It takes time and effort to obtain valid and reliable
results.
• It depends on i...
Testing oral ability ppt
Testing oral ability ppt
Testing oral ability ppt
Testing oral ability ppt
Próxima SlideShare
Cargando en…5
×

Testing oral ability ppt

702 visualizaciones

Publicado el

Presentation of "Testing oral ability" (Paula Salazar and Ángela Martínez). Second Language Teaching and Learning Masters Degree. 2016-2017

Publicado en: Educación
0 comentarios
1 recomendación
Estadísticas
Notas
  • Sé el primero en comentar

Sin descargas
Visualizaciones
Visualizaciones totales
702
En SlideShare
0
De insertados
0
Número de insertados
0
Acciones
Compartido
0
Descargas
26
Comentarios
0
Recomendaciones
1
Insertados 0
No insertados

No hay notas en la diapositiva.

Testing oral ability ppt

  1. 1. 1. Representative tasks • Specify all possible content • Include a representative sample of the specified content when setting tasks 2. Elicit a valid sample of oral ability  Choose appropriate techniques  Plan and structure the testing carefully 3. Ensure valid and reliable scoring  Create appropriate scales for scoring  Calibrate the scale to be used  Train scorers  Follow acceptable scoring procedures 4. Example 5. Conclusion
  2. 2.  Content of the Cambridge CCSE Test Oral Interaction  Operation content specification.  Expressing: like, dislike  Directing: advising, instructing  Describing: actions, events  Eliciting: information, help  Types of text: discussion  Addressees: interlocutor  Topics: Unspecified  Dialect, accent and style: unspecified  The categorization of the operations (here referred to as skills) is based on Bygate (1987)
  3. 3. Skills:  Informational skills  Provide personal information  Give instructions  Apologise  Complain  Interactional skills  Express agreement  Elicit opinions  Justify or support statements or opinions of other speakers  Express disagreement  Skills in managing interactions  Initiate interactions  Change the topic of an interaction  Give turns to other speakers  Come to a decision
  4. 4. Types of text  Presentation (monologue)  Discussion  Conversation  Interview Other speakers (addresses)  Equal or higher status  Known or unknown Topics familiar or interesting to the candidates Dialect British or American English Accent RP, Standard American Style formal and informal Vocabulary range Non-technical, except as the result of preparation for a presentation Rate of speechVaries according to the task
  5. 5. 1. Candidate talks with teacher from their own institution. AIM elicit describing, explaining and justifying. 2. Candidates talk- after some time teacher joins. AIM elicit exchanging opinions and justifying. Pay attention to LEVEL 4 CCSE (Cambridge Certificates in Communicative Skills in English) The test has two sections:
  6. 6. There are three general formats 1. Format 1 interview  The most common format  1 serious drawback the candidate speaks to a superior and is unwilling to take the initiative.  Useful techniques to solve this problem:  Questions and request information:  Requests for elaboration: what exactly do you mean? What would be a good example of that?  Appearing not to understand: i´m sorry but I don´t quite follow you.  Invitation to ask questions: is there anything you would like to ask me?  Interruption  Abrupt change of topic
  7. 7. Pictures useful for descriptions Role play AIM elicit natural languageExample:  A friend invites you to a party on an evening when you want to stay at home and watch the last episose of a television serial. Thank the friend (played by the tester) and refuse politely. Interpreting it can test:  production ( the candidate tries to convey the meaning of what the native speaker says)  comprehesion (the candidate attemps to convey what the visitor is saying) Prepared monologue only if prepared presentations is something required by the candidate Reading aloud only if it has been a course objective
  8. 8. 2. Format 2 Interaction with fellow candidates  Advantage elicits language that is appropriate to exchanges between equals; candidates feel more confident.  Problem The performance of one candidate is likely to be affected by that of the others. Better not to have more than two candidates interacting. Possible techniques to use: Discussion Role play: tester is an observer difficulty imagining the teacher as a friend.
  9. 9. 3. Format 3 Responses to audio- or video- recordings Use of the same computer generated or audio/video recorded stimuli. Semi-direct format Disadvantage: INFLEXIBILITY—> no way of following up candidate´s responses. A good source of techniques ARELS Examination in Spoken English and Comprehension, which incluse: Described situations: example: You are walking through town one day and you meet two friends who you were sure had gone to live in the USA. What do you say? Remarks in isolation to respond to: example there is a good film on TV tonight. Simulated conversation
  10. 10. 1. Timing  make the oral test as long as is feasible. 2. Plan the test. 3. Give the student many ways of being assessed. 4. Have a second tester present. 5. The task asked, should be expected. 6. Good acoustic. 7. Put the candidates at their ease so that thet can show what they are capable of. 8. Collect enough relevant information. 9. Give enough talking time to the candidate. 10.Select interviewers carefullt and train them. Reminder… Testers should avoid be seen making notes on the candidates’ performance.
  11. 11. Example of planning an oral test
  12. 12. TEST’S STAGES 1. Background and over view 2.Assignig candidates to levels 3. Conducting interviews 4. Assessment
  13. 13.  Examples: 1, 2 ACCURACY Pronunciation APPROPRIACY The use of language RANGE Vocabulary, language available to the candidate FLEXIBILITY Adaptation to changes at the conversation SIZE Capability of making lenghty and complex contributions where appropriate
  14. 14.  great care must be taken into account to ignore personal qualities of the candidates.
  15. 15. Assessing group oral presentation. Methodology and Resources for English Teaching. Craeted by students. Rubric.
  16. 16. • Assessing oral abilities is not easy. • It takes time and effort to obtain valid and reliable results. • It depends on individual institutions the appropriatness of content, rating scales levels, elicitation of techniques.

×