Effects of task types on interactional competence in oral communication assessment

Abstract

<p>Studies of interaction in speaking assessment have highlighted problems regarding</p> <p>the unequal distribution of interaction patterns in interviews versus paired formats (Van Lier,</p> <p>1989; Young & He, 1998). These studies, however, only looked at verbal interaction</p> <p>features, and no attempts in these studies were made to investigate both verbal and nonverbal</p> <p>interaction features elicited in interviews versus paired formats. Therefore, the purpose of</p> <p>this dissertation is to examine the effects of task types on the elicitation of interaction</p> <p>features in speaking assessment. The study has three aims: investigate which interaction</p> <p>features raters noticed when evaluating interaction in the individual and paired discussion</p> <p>task; investigate if these different tasks elicited similar or different interaction features; and</p> <p>examine the extent to which these features contributed to variance in interactional</p> <p>competence scores across task types. To achieve these goals, an individual scripted interview</p> <p>and a paired discussion task are analyzed using a mixed-methods approach.</p> <p>A qualitative analysis of 32 verbal reports from four raters judging test takers’</p> <p>interactional competence showed that raters attended to five nonverbal and 14 verbal</p> <p>interaction features in both tasks. An interaction ability scale was developed based on those</p> <p>features. Two raters evaluated 68 test-taker performances both analytically using the scale</p> <p>and holistically using an interactional competence scale. The analytic scores were used to</p> <p>conduct an exploratory factor analysis which revealed four factors: body language, topic</p> <p>management, interactional management, and interactive listening. Logistic regression</p> <p>analyses showed that while the individual task elicited more topic management features, the</p> <p>paired discussion task elicited more interactional management features. Then, the holistic and</p> <p>analytic scores were analyzed using simple regressions, which showed that body language</p> <p>and topic management features predicted interactional competence scores in the individual</p> <p>task, whereas body language, topic management, interactional management, and interactive</p> <p>listening features were predictors of scores in the paired discussion task.</p> <p>The findings suggest that both nonverbal and verbal interaction features are important</p> <p>in the interactional competence construct. The paired format provides test takers with more</p> <p>opportunities to demonstrate their interactional ability. The study also suggests the</p> <p>importance of rater training in evaluating interactional competence.</p>