Speaking tasks involving peer-to-peer candidate interaction are increasingly being incorporated into language proficiency assessments, in both large-scale international testing contexts, and in smaller-scale, for example course-related, ones. This growth in the popularity and use of paired and group orals has stimulated research, particularly into the types of discourse produced and the possible impact of candidate background factors on performance. However, despite the fact that the strongest argument for the validity of peer-to-peer assessment lies in the claim that such tasks allow for the assessment of a broader range of interactional skills than the more traditional interview-format tests do, there is surprisingly little research into the judgments that are made of such performances. The fact that raters, and rating criteria, are in a crucial mediating position between output and outcomes, warrants investigation into how raters construe the interaction in these tasks. Such investigations have the potential to inform the development of interaction-based rating scales and ensure that validity claims are moved beyond the content level to the construct level. This paper reports the findings of a verbal protocol study of teacher-raters viewing the paired test discourse of 17 beginner dyads in a university-based Spanish as a foreign language course. The findings indicate that the raters identified three interaction parameters: non-verbal interpersonal communication, interactive listening, and interactional management. The findings have implications for our understanding of the construct of effective interaction in paired candidate speaking tests, and for the development of appropriate rating scales.

This study investigates the relationship between performances on the speaking component of the TOEFL iBT^TM with performances on academic oral assessment tasks. For the academic tasks, we recorded and transcribed the performances of five local and five high-achieving international undergraduate students on oral assessment tasks in core first-year subjects in three faculties, a total of thirty students. For the TOEFL speaking tasks, we transcribed the performances of six high scoring students from mixed language backgrounds on the two independent and four integrated speaking tasks of the TOEFL iBT^TM. On the basis of an analysis of the rhetorical moves characteristic of the two speaking contexts, we conclude that while the moves characteristic of the TOEFL tasks are largely represented in the academic tasks, there are also some differences across the two contexts. These findings both support and challenge the domain definition inference of the TOEFL iBT^TM validity argument.

This paper reports on a small-scale study that is the first to explore Advanced Spanish L2 learners’ personal awareness of their language and culture learning through e-assessment tasks in an Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) context, mediated by five task-specific, individual spoken reflections. The value of reflection in education, particularly for L2 writing and distance learning, has been explored in different modalities, e.g., individual spoken reflection and group spoken reflection. Building on previous research, this study explores a group of advanced Spanish L2 learners (n = 25) reflecting on five multi-modal e-assessments through individually assessed oral audio-recorded post-assessment reflection tasks (n = 125). A thematic content analysis applied to transcriptions yields findings from a pedagogical perspective on language learning, completing assessments and personal affective responses. The learners’ candid and explicit orientations towards various types of multimodal language-learning e-assessment tasks offer instructors information on learners’ awareness of classroom-based assessment tasks being enablers for individual learning goals.

Student and teacher perceptions of feedback practices, preferences and awareness of feedback needs may differ and detract from learning. This article explores alignment or misalignment in higher education to argue alignment suggests needs are being met on these issues via technology-enabled feedback on writing. Within the context of academic training, we take a broad view of writing supervision along a continuum that comprises digital feedback on writing assessments at an Australian university. We used a survey comparison of teachers’ and students’ self-reported data to answer the following questions: (1) What digital feedback and assessment practices are reported by teachers and students in Australian higher education? (2) What e-feedback needs are self-declared through teachers’ and students’ self-awareness of assessment practices in that context? (3) What e-feedback preferences are reported by teachers and students? Students and teachers from different academic programmes and levels from social science self-reported their experiences of digital feedback on writing assessments. The quantitative and open-ended responses covered technology-enabled feedback experiences up to PhD supervision. The results on alignment and misalignment of participants’ needs and preferences suggest a need to increase dialogue and incorporate student agency into feedback processes. We discuss further implications for feedback experiences in this context. Implications for practice or policy

In Pakistan, English is the official language and a high level of proficiency is considered a passport to success (Manan et al., 2016). However, little is known about Pakistani English teachers’ assessment knowledge and training needs. This study investigates the language assessment literacy of English language teachers at a multi-campus English Medium Instruction university in Pakistan. The aims were (1) to evaluate whether the EAP teachers were equipped, academically and professionally, to design and conduct language assessment; (2) to document teachers’ language assessment challenges in context and (3) to consult teachers on their training needs in assessment. Data comprised questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and ELT curriculum documents. The analysis revealed little or no training in LAL, large classes, a crowded curriculum, and mixed student abilities impacting on language assessment practices. Implications are discussed for the training needed to support teachers’ language assessment practices that underpin student success in EMI programs.