Original Article
A Rationale for Criterion‐Referenced Proficiency Testing
Ray Clifford (PhD, University of Minnesota) is Director of the Center for Language Studies and Associate Dean of the College of Humanities, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.
Abstract
This article summarizes some of the technical issues that add to the complexity of language testing. It focuses in particular on the criterion‐referenced nature of the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines—Speaking; and it proposes a criterion‐referenced interpretation of the ACTFL guidelines for reading and listening. It then demonstrates how using criterion‐referenced testing and scoring enhances the accuracy of reading and listening proficiency ratings while also providing informative feedback to learners.
Citing Literature
Number of times cited: 3
- Troy L. Cox and Margaret E. Malone, A validity argument to support the ACTFL Assessment of Performance Toward Proficiency in Languages (AAPPL), Foreign Language Annals, 51, 3, (548-574), (2018).
- Maria M. Summers, Troy L. Cox, Benjamin L. McMurry and Dan P. Dewey, Investigating the use of the ACTFL can-do statements in a self-assessment for student placement in an Intensive English Program, System, 10.1016/j.system.2018.12.012, (2018).
- Troy L. Cox, Understanding Intermediate‐Level Speakers’ Strengths and Weaknesses: An Examination of OPIc Tests From Korean Learners of English, Foreign Language Annals, 50, 1, (84-113), (2017).
