Anne Lazaraton

Evaluative Criteria for Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: Whose Criteria and Whose Research?

This paper examines various criteria that have been proposed for evaluating the increasing number of empirical studies carried out using qualitative research methods, and it demonstrates how such criteria may privilege certain forms of qualitative research while excluding others. A broader disciplinary view is taken by defining qualitative research, and by discussing in more detail the two qualitative traditions that have achieved prominence in applied linguistics, ethnography, and conversation analysis. Then, select existing evaluative criteria for qualitative research proposed by applied linguists, as well as additional criteria developed outside applied linguistics, are examined. Finally, the issue of criteriology is considered, on which some of the assumptions underlying the existing evaluative criteria are based. To conclude, this article discusses the complex relationship between research method and evaluative criteria and the role of professional journals in establishing and validating such criteria.

Incidental Displays of Cultural Knowledge in the Nonnative-English-Speaking Teacher's Classroom

This article examines incidental cultural knowledge displays by two nonnative-English-speaking teachers (NNESTs) in their intensive English program classrooms. Surprisingly, until recently, NNESTs have received little empirical attention in the literature, even though questions continue to arise about their language competence, pedagogical knowledge, and cultural orientation. This study goes beyond existing work on the impressions, ree ections, and beliefs of NNESTs to ask, What is the nature of the discourse produced in ESL classes taught by NNESTs? And, more to the point, does an analysis of this discourse suggest real problems with language, teaching, or culture? An analysis of videotaped classroom data of two teachers indicated that a wide and unpredictable range of cultural topics arose. Although with one exception they were able to deal with the cultural topics by displaying knowledge in a competent manner, the analysis suggested missed opportunities in that the teachers did not admit “ I don’ t know,” thus providing the chance for their students to become cultural informants in the classroom.

A Microanalytic Perspective on Discourse, Proficiency, and Identity in Paired Oral Assessment

The increasing popularity of paired format in oral testing has engendered legitimate scrutiny of its reliability and validity as compared with the more traditional interviewer–interviewee arrangement. Although characteristics such as the gender, cultural/L1 background, and language proficiency of ones interlocutor likely affects the discourse produced with a partner, the question remains whether this interlocutor effect influences scores on the test. In this article, the construct interlocutor effect is further examined. Initially, transcript data from two large-scale speaking tests were analyzed by working backward from testtaker scores to locate discourse features to support those scores; identity formulations, such as “proficient” and “competent,” as constructed in and through the discourse test takers produce, emerged as a salient feature of the talk. Specifically, we posit that a test taker brings a language proficiency identity to a test task, and this identity is constructed, mediated, and displayed in the talk. We argue that “proficiency” is fluid, in that it will shift—on a turn-by-turn basis—based on who we are talking to in a second language and what sort of identity(ies) we bring to and are mediated in that interaction. It is this aspect of the interlocutor effect that merits more attention.

From Guessing What Teachers Think to Finding out What Teachers Know: The Need for a Research Agenda

Eisner, E. (1983). The art and craft of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40, 5-13. Hopkins, D. (1985). A teachers guide to action research. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press. Kemmis, S. (1985). Action research and the politics of reflection. In D. Boud, R. Keogh, & D. Walker (Eds.), Reflection: Turning experience into learning (pp. 139-163). London: Kogan Page. Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27-56. Somekh, B. (1993). Quality in educational research: The contribution of classroom teachers. In J. Edge & K. Richards (Eds.), Teachers develop teachers research (pp. 26-38). Oxford: Heinemann. Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.

From Cloze to Consequences and Beyond: An Interview With Elana Shohamy

Professor Elana Shohamy was born in New York and moved to Israel at a young age. It was an interesting time for the country and the Hebrew language, and Elana shares her keen insights into her experiences growing up in Israel. She obtained her teacher’s certificate from David Yelin Teacher’s College in Jerusalem, specializing in teaching English as a Second Language. After moving to Minnesota in 1968, she got a B.A. in Economics from Hamline University in Saint Paul and went directly into the Ph.D. program in second language education and measurement & evaluation at the University of Minnesota. Her doctoral dissertation, entitled Investigation of Concurrent Validity of the Oral Interview Test With the Cloze Procedure for Measuring Language Proficiency, was completed in 1978. After 2 years as a postdoctoral researcher at Stanford University and the coordinator of the Hebrew program at UC Berkeley from 1979 to 1981, Elana went to Israel and began her career at Tel Aviv University, where she is currently a professor and Chair of the Language Education Program in the School of Education. Elana has been a ubiquitous presence in applied linguistics and language assessment, both in print and in person. She is the author of two scholarly books and the coauthor of two more; she has also coedited five additional books, one of which is Volume 7: Language Testing and Assessment in the second edition of the Encyclopedia of Language and Education (2008, Springer). She has authored or coauthored more than 40 refereed journal articles and more than 50 book chapters. Elana founded the journal Language Policy and served as Associate Editor

Book Review: Traditional Approach but a Worthy Choice

The instructor of an introductory course in language assessment is fortunate to have a number of textbook choices available. As a first-time teacher of such a course at my institution, I was pleased to see that Arthur Hughes’ Testing for Language Teachers had recently appeared as a “completely revised” edition. I had used the first edition (1989) quite successfully just after it was published; students were generally pleased with its tidy layout, its simple and concise explanations, and its end-of-chapter activities and further readings. The only significant problem with the book was its British orientation to U.K.-based language tests (ARELS, FCE) and to vocabulary. As a result, I had high hopes for using the newer edition with graduate students at the University of Minnesota this past semester. Testing for Language Teachers (TLT) claims to be “the most practical guide for teachers who want to have a better understanding of the role of testing in language teaching” (back cover) and strives “to help language teachers write better tests” (p. xi). It is hard to argue with these claims: The book deals with the desirable qualities of tests and the testing of component language skills in an accessible and concise matter. Although Hughes points out that the book is based on the testing of EFL, readers who design assessments in other languages should have no trouble whatsoever applying the concepts covered to the development of other foreign language tests. The content of TLT is much the same as the first edition. The first chapter deals with teaching and testing, a pep talk of sorts for readers, who will learn not only LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT QUARTERLY, 2(1), 77–81 Copyright