Elvis Wagner

The effect of the use of video texts on ESL listening test-taker performance:

Video is widely used in the teaching of L2 listening, and SLA researchers have argued that the visual components of spoken texts are useful for the listener in comprehending aural information. Yet video texts are rarely used on tests of L2 listening ability, perhaps in part due to the belief that including the visual channel involves assessing something beyond listening ability. In this study, a quasi-experimental design was used to compare the performance of two groups of learners on an ESL listening test. The control group took a listening test with audio-only texts. The experimental group took the same listening test, except that test-takers received the input through the use of video texts. Multi-variate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) was used to compare the two groups’ performance, and it was found that the video (experimental) group scored 6.5% higher than the audio-only (control) group on the overall post-test, and this difference was statistically significant. The results of the study suggest that the non-verbal information in the video texts contributed to the video group’s superior performance.

Video Listening Tests: What Are They Measuring?.

This article examines how eight advanced ESL learners attend to and utilize the nonverbal information found in a video text. Using verbal report methodology in which test-takers verbalized aloud their thought processes while taking a video listening test, the results suggested that the test-takers varied in how they attended to and utilized the nonverbal information provided by the video texts. In addition, the data provided evidence that individual test-takers varied in their ability to utilize the nonverbal information both to make meaning of the spoken text and to answer the comprehension items associated with the text. The implications for a construct definition of listening ability that includes the ability to utilize the nonverbal information found in most spoken texts is discussed.

An Investigation of How the Channel of Input and Access to Test Questions Affect L2 Listening Test Performance

The use of video technology has become widespread in the teaching and testing of second-language (L2) listening, yet research into how this technology affects the learning and testing process has lagged. The current study investigated how the channel of input (audiovisual vs. audio-only) used on an L2 listening test affected test-taker performance. In addition, how access to the test questions while the text was played (questions accessible vs. questions not accessible) affected performance was investigated. A total of 192 English as a Second Language learners took a listening test under four different conditions: audiovisual input and test questions accessible, audio-only input and test questions accessible, audiovisual input and test questions not accessible, and audio-only input and test questions not accessible. A 2 × 2 factorial analysis of variance conducted with the data indicated that test-takers who received audiovisual input scored higher than test-takers who received audio-only input, whereas access to test questions did not affect test-taker performance, and there was no interaction between the two independent variables. From these results, a number of implications for L2 testing are presented.

The Duolingo English Test

This article provides a critical conceptual review of the Duolingo English test (DET) and explore possible consequences of its use for university admissions purposes. Because the DET is very new, t...

Assessing L2 Listening

This book is relevant for language testers, listening researchers, and oral proficiency teachers, in that it explores four broad themes related to the assessment of L2 listening ability: the use of authentic, real-world spoken texts; the effects of different speech varieties of listening inputs; the use of audio-visual texts; and assessing listening as part of an interactive speaking/listening construct. Each theme is introduced with a review of the relevant literature, and then is examined through either two or three empirical studies. The notion of authenticity underlies each of these four themes. By creating more authentic test tasks that are similar to real world language tasks, test developers can create listening assessments that not only more effectively assess test takers’ communicative competence, but can also have a positive washback effect on educational systems.

English learners left behind: standardized testing as language policy

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was passed by the US Congress and signed into law by President Bush in 2001. The passing of this sweeping legislation was a watershed moment for proponents of standards-based education. The law mandated that all students in American public schools must demonstrate competency in a number of academic standards, and also mandated that each state demonstrate how every child was meeting those standards, or at least was making ‘adequate yearly progress’ toward meeting those standards. Proponents of NCLB hailed it as an initiative that would raise the educational standards and learning for all students. Accountability was and is the buzzword associated with this legislation the law was trumpeted as a way to hold teachers, schools, and states accountable for assuring that every child would be able to meet the standards. While NCLB stated that each state could design its own assessment to measure students’ attainment of and progression toward meeting the standards, not surprisingly, most states elected to use standardized tests to meet these accountability mandates. In this book, which grew out of her dissertation research in New York City public schools, Kate Menken examines the impact of the testing components of NCLB on language policy and pedagogy in the American public school system. Specifically, Menken argues that the tests used to meet NCLB accountability demands have led to a de facto language policy, resulting not only in a reduced role for bilingual education in the USA, but also a major change in how English language learners (ELLs) are taught. The book is divided into three sections (Language policy context, Standardized tests in daily school life, and Expansion and recommendations), with three chapters devoted to each section. In introducing the book and the language policy context in the USA, the author differentiates between language ‘policy’ and language ‘planning,’ arguing that there is no official language policy in the USA, and that official decisions are usually ad hoc responses to particular situations or political pressures. Because of this lack of official language planning, USA language policy is particularly susceptible to laws and mandates that result in de facto language policy, as has happened with the testing mandates associated with NCLB. Menken argues that this focus on standardized testing has had an outsized influence on school curricula, pedagogy, and bilingual education. Chapter 2 provides a useful and informative overview of past US language and educational policies, the history of the testing movement, linguistic diversity in the USA, different program models for ELL education, historical language policy decisions, anti-immigrant and English-only movements, and the development of and response to the sweeping educational legislation of NCLB. Menken describes how popular attitudes toward speakers of languages other than English have vacillated International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism Vol. 12, No. 6, November 2009, 721 737