Testing Approaches and Psycholinguistic Processes in Input Modification Studies: A Critical Review

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 3, 1190 - 1201, 13.05.2015

Azam Naserpour Mahmood Reza Moradian

Öz

Abstract. Language testing and language teaching are closely interrelated, each influencing the other. Language testing has followed the trends in language teaching, which have, in turn, influenced by theories in linguistics and psychology. The psycholinguistic processes, therefore, in which psychological and linguistic principles are considered as the underlying theoretical assumptions of test construction receive a great importance.  On the other hand, input modification studies, including simplification, elaboration, and enhancement, aim to investigate the effect of the types of input modification on enhancing the learners’ comprehension rate. The present study, therefore, intends to critically review testing and assessment approaches and the psycholinguistic processes the input modification studies. This study first overviews the trends of language testing from the beginning to present, and then reviews critically testing and assessment techniques and the psycholinguistic processes employed in some of the most salient studies conducted in the field of input modification. The results of this review showed that language testing in input modification studies mainly goes around discreet-point and integrative testing and does not occur in a natural realistic environment, although there are few exceptions in this regard. These exceptions include debates, thinking aloud, and free recalling the context, which are communicatively oriented. Findings also indicated that among the psychological processes employed in these studies the predominant process was comprehension/production.

Anahtar Kelimeler

testing approaches, psycholinguistic processes; input modification studies; critical review

Kaynakça

• Alderson, J. C. (1978). Report of the discussion on communicative language testing. In J. C. Alderson and A. Hughes (Eds.). Issues in Language Testing. ELT Documents 111. London: The British Council.
• Anthony, B. (2001).Testing: Basic Concepts: Basic Terminology. English   Teaching   Professional, Issue 20.
• Bachman, L. F. (1995) Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bachman, L. F. (1991) What Does Language Testing Have to Offer? TESOL QUARTERLY, 25(4).
• Bachman, L. F. (2008). Some reflections on task-based language performance assessment. Language Testing, SAGE Publications, 19; 453. DOI: 10.1191/0265532202lt240oa.
• Bachman, L.F., & Palmer, A.S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Brindley, G. (1991) Developments in Language Testing. Singapore: Regional Language Centre, in Anivan. S (ed.)
• Burrows, C. (1993). Assessment guidelines for the certificate in spoken and written English: Educational Draft (Vols. 1–5). Sydney, Australia: New South Wales Adult Migrant English Service.
• Canagarajah, S. (2006). Changing communicative needs, revised assessment objectives: testing english as an international language. LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT QUARTERLY, 3(3), 229–242.
• Canale, M (1983) Language and Communication. In J. C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt (eds.). London: Longman.
• Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980) Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1).
• Chung, H. (1995). Effects of elaborative modification on second language reading comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
• Clapham, C. (2000). Assessment and testing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, Cambridge University Press 0267-1905/00, 20, 147–161.
• Crossley, S. A. & Yang, H. S. (2014). What’s so simple about simplified texts? A computational and psycholinguistic investigation of text comprehension and text processing. Reading in a Foreign Language, 26(1), 92–113.
• Dadehbeigi, M. (2001). The impact of lexical parenthetical paraphrase, exemplification, and repetition on the reading performance of Iranian EST students. Unpublished MA Thesis. University for Teacher Education, Tehran, Iran.
• Donald, E. P. (2010). The case for a comprehensive, four-skills assessment of English language proficiency. TOEIC Compendium.
• Doughty, C. (1991). Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study of SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 431-496.
• Farhady, F., Jafarpur, A., Birjandi, P. (2003). Testing language skills from theory to practice. The Center for Studying and Compiling University Books in Humanities (SAMT).
• Hughes, N. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study on ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 541-577.
• Jourdenaise, R. M. (1998). The effects of textual enhancement on the acquisition of the Spanish preterit and imperfect. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
• Jourdenaise, R. M., Ota, M. Stauffer, S., Boyson, B., & Doughty, C. (1995). Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think aloud protocol analysis. In R. Smith (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 183-216). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
• Kim, Y. (1996). Effects of text elaboration on intentional and incidental foreign language vocabulary learning. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
• Kim, Y. (2006). Effects of input elaboration on vocabulary acquisition through reading by Korean learners of English as a foreign language. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 341-373.
• Long, M. H., & Norris, J. M. (2000). Task-based language teaching and assessment. In M. Byram (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language teaching (pp. 597-603).London: Rutledge.
• Lee, S. K. (2007). Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL Students' reading comprehension and learning of passive forms. Language Learning, 57, 87-11
• Leow, R. P. (1997). The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 readers' comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 8, 151-182.
• Leow, R. P. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84, 496-509.
• Mackey, A. and Gass, S. M. (2005). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. [32] Madsen, H. S. (1983). Techniques in testing. Oxford: Oxford university press.
• Maleki, Z. & Pazhakh, A.R. (2012). The Effects of Pre Modified Input, Interactionally Modified Input, and Modified Output on EFL Learners’ Comprehension of New Vocabularies. International Journal of Higher Education. 1(1), 128-137.
• Marefat, F. and Moradian, M. R. (2008). Effects of Lexical Elaborative Devices on Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: Evidence from Reading. TELL, Vol. 2 No. 6, 101-124.
• Mazaheri, M. (1995). The effects of syntactic simplification and repetition on listening comprehension of EFL students. Unpublished MA thesis. Allame Tabatabaie University, Tehran, Iran.
• McNamara, T. (1996). Measuring Second Language Performance. Harlow, Essex, UK: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.
• Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Education Researcher, 32(2), 13-23.
• Mislevy R. J., Steinberg L., and Almond R. G. (2002). Design and analysis in task-based language assessment. Language Testing, 19 (4), 477–496.
• Miyata-Boddy, N. and Langham, C. S. (2000). Communicative language testing-an attainable goal? The British Council, Tokyo, 75-82.
• Mobarra, M. K. (1999). The effects of simplification and elaboration on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Unpublished MA Thesis. University for Teacher Education, Tehran, Iran.
• Moradian, M.R. (2009). The Effects of Lexical Elaboration and Typographical Enhancement on Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition through Reading by Iranian Learners of English. A doctoral dissertation. Allameh Tabatabaee University, Iran.
• Moradian, M.R. & Adel. M.R. (2011). Explicit Lexical Elaboration as an Autonomy Enhancing Tool for Acquisition of L2 Vocabulary from Reading. Studies in Literature and
• Language. Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture, 3(3), 153-159.
• Moradian, M. R., Naserpoor, A., & Tamri, M. S. (2013). Effects of lexical simplification and elaboration of ESP texts on Iranian EFL university students’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Research, 2(6), 332-338.
• Morrow, K. (1981) Communicative language testing: evolution or revolution? In J. C. Alderson and A. Hughes (Eds.). Issues in Language Testing. ELT Documents 111. London: The British Council.
• Nabifar, L. (2002). Lexical modification of EST texts: Simplification vs. elaboration. Unpublished MA Thesis. Iran University of Science and Technology.
• Noorshams, M. R. (2003). The impact of simplification and elaboration on EFL learners' listening comprehension. Unpublished MA Thesis. University for Teacher Education, Tehran, Iran.
• Oller, W.J. Jr. (1979). Language tests at school. U.S.A: Longman Group Ltd.
• Overstreet, M. H. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229-258.
• Panahi, A. (2012). Binding task-based language teaching and task-based language testing:
• survey into EFL teachers and learners' views of task-based approach. English Language Teaching, 5(2).
• Rahimi, M. A. (2003). Syntactic complexity of EST written texts: Utilization of a priori elaboration and linguistic adjustment techniques to enhance their comprehensibility. Unpublished MA Thesis. Iran University of Science and Technology.
• Schmitt, N. (2002). An introduction to applied linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
• Shook, D. J. (1994). FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Linguistics, 5, 57-93.
• Silva, A. D. (2000). Text elaboration and vocabulary learning. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
• Spolsky, B. (1975) Communicative Competence, Language Proficiency and Beyond. Applied Linguistics, 10(2).
• Spolsky, B. (1995) Measured Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Tabatabaei, O. (2011). The Effect of Multimedia Glosses on Online Computerized L2 Text Comprehension and Vocabulary Learning of Iranian EFL Learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 714-725).
• Urano, K. (2000). Lexical simplification and elaboration: Sentence comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
• Weidman, A. (2006). Assessing academic literacy a task-based approach. Forthcoming in language matters 37.
• Weir, C. J. (1990) Communicative language testing. London: Prentice Hall.
• White, J. (1998). Getting the learners' attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 85-113). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Wong, W. Y. (2000). The effects of textual enhancement and simplified input on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL