In:Meaningful Language Test Scores: Research to enhance score interpretation
Edited by Spiros Papageorgiou and Venessa F. Manna
[Innovations in Language Learning and Assessment 1] 2023
► pp. 1–11
Chapter 1Overview of research to enhance score interpretation
Published online: 29 June 2023
https://doi.org/10.1075/illa.1.01pap
https://doi.org/10.1075/illa.1.01pap
Abstract
The primary motivation for administering a language test is to use
its scores to facilitate decisions of various kinds about language proficiency.
Score-based decisions can be extremely consequential, both for test takers but
also for test score users, such as universities and employers, and society
overall. This book presents research efforts to enhance the interpretation of
English language test scores provided by Educational Testing Service (ETS), and
ultimately their usefulness for decision making. The different approaches for
the enhancement of score interpretation are discussed. The research reported in
each chapter is then briefly presented in relation to the various score
enhancement approaches. The chapter concludes with a summary of challenges
related to (mis)interpretation of language test scores.
Article outline
- Test scores, decisions, and consequences
- Approaches to enhancing score interpretation
- Organization of the book
- Conclusion
Notes References
References (33)
American Council on the
Teaching of Foreign
Languages. (2012). ACTFL
proficiency guidelines. Retrieved on 6
February 2023 from [URL]
American Educational Research
Association, American Psychological Association, & National
Council on Measurement in
Education. (2014). Standards
for educational and psychological
testing. American Educational Research Association. Retrieved on
6 February 2023 from [URL]
Angoff, W. H. (1971). Scales,
norms and equivalent
scores. In R. L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational
measurement (2nd
ed., pp. 508–600). American Council on Education.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language
assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and
justifying their use in the real
world. Oxford University Press.
Beaton, A., & Allen, N. (1992). Interpreting
scales through scale
anchoring. Journal of Educational
Statistics, 17(2), 191–204.
Centre for Canadian Language
Benchmarks. (2012). Canadian
language benchmarks: English as a second language for
adults. Retrieved on 6 February 2023
from [URL]
Chapelle, C. A. (2008). The
TOEFL® validity
argument. In C. Chapelle, M. Enright, & J. Jamieson (Eds.), Building
a validity argument for the Test of English as a Foreign
Language (pp. 319–352). Routledge.
Cho, Y., Ginsburgh, M., Morgan, R., Moulder, B., Xi, X., & Hauck, M. C. (2016). Designing
the TOEFL® Primary™
tests (Research Memorandum No.
RM–16–02). ETS. Retrieved
on 6 February 2023 from [URL]
Council of
Europe. (2001). The
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning,
teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.
ETS. (2010). Comparing TOEFL® and IELTS™ total scores. Retrieved on 10 March 2023 [URL]
. (2020). TOEFL®
research insight series: Vol. 1. TOEFL iBT® test
framework and test development. Retrieved
on 6 February 2023 from [URL]
Fulcher, G. (2016). Standards
and
frameworks. In D. Tsagari & J. Banerjee (Eds.), Handbook
of second language
assessment (pp. 29–44). De Gruyter Mouton.
Garcia Gomez, P., Noah, A, Schedl, M., Wright, C., & Yolkut, A. (2007). Proficiency
descriptors based on a scale-anchoring study of the new TOEFL iBT
reading test. Language
Testing, 24(3), 417–435.
Harris, D. J. (2007). Practical
issues in vertical
scaling. In N. J. Dorans, M. Pommerich & P. W. Holland (Eds.), Linking
and aligning scores and
scales (pp. 233–251). Springer.
Kane, M. (2013). Validating
the interpretations and uses of test
scores. Journal of Educational
Measurement, 50(1), 1–73.
Kane, M. T. (1992). An
argument-based approach to
validity. Psychological
Bulletin, 112(3), 527–535.
Kolen, M. J. (2006). Scaling
and
norming. In R. L. Brennan (Ed.), Educational
measurement (4th
ed., pp. 156–186). Praeger.
Liao, C.-W. (2010). TOEIC®
Listening and Reading Test scale anchoring
study (ETS Rep.
TC–10–05). ETS. Retrieved
on 6 February 2023 from [URL]
Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications
of Item Response Theory to practical testing
problems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational
measurement (3rd
ed., pp. 13–103). Macmillan.
Milanovic, M., & Weir, C. J. (2010). Series
editors’
note. In W. Martyniuk (Ed.), Relating
language examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages: Case studies and reflections on the use of the
Council of Europe’s Draft
Manual (pp. viii–xx). Cambridge University Press.
National Education
Examinations
Authority. (2018). China’s
standards of English language
ability. Retrieved on 6 February 2023
from [URL]
Papageorgiou, S., & Cho, Y. (2014). An
investigation of the use of TOEFL Junior Standard scores for ESL
placement decisions in secondary
education. Language
Testing, 31(2), 223–239.
Papageorgiou, S., Davis, L., Norris, J. M., Garcia Gomez, P., Manna, V. F., & Monfils, L. (2021). Design
framework for the TOEFL®
Essentials™
test 2021 (Research
Memorandum No.
RM–21–03). ETS. Retrieved
on 6 February 2023 [URL]
Papageorgiou, S., & Manna, V. F. (2021). Maintaining
access to a large-scale test of academic language proficiency during
the pandemic: The launch of TOEFL iBT Home
Edition. Language Assessment
Quarterly, 18(1), 36–41.
Papageorgiou, S., & Tannenbaum, R. J. (2016). Situating
standard setting within argument-based
validity. Language Assessment
Quarterly, 13(2), 109–123.
Papageorgiou, S., Wu, S., Hsieh, C.-N., Tannenbaum, R. J., & Cheng, M. M. (2019). Mapping
the TOEFL iBT® test scores to China’s standards of
English language ability: Implications for score interpretation and
use (Research Report No.
TOEFL-RR–89). ETS.
Powers, D., Schedl, M., & Papageorgiou, S. (2017). Facilitating
the interpretation of English language proficiency scores: Combining
scale anchoring and test score mapping
methodologies. Language
Testing, 34(2), 175–195.
Ryan, J. (2006). Practices,
issues, and trends in student test score
reporting. In S. Downing & T. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook
of test
development (pp. 677–710). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.