Abstract
The validity of three English oral language proficiency tests was examined in terms of Cummin’s BICS/CALP distinction. The tests studied included the Idea Oral Language Proficiency Test (IPT-I; Ballard, Tighe, and Dalton, 1989), the Language Assessment Scales (LAS; De Avila and Duncan,), and the Woodcock Language Proficiency Battery--Revised (WLPB-R:Woodcock, 1991). An examination of test content and pattern of correlations between subscales is used to describe the way oral language proficiency has been conceptualized and operationalized for each of the three oral language proficiency tests. These three tests measure similar and dissimilar aspects of oral language proficiency. Some of the similar and dissimilar aspects support the BICS/CALP distinction. Implications for evaluating oral language proficiency tests are discussed.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 55-68 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Bilingual Research Journal |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1996 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Education
- Language and Linguistics
- Linguistics and Language
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative validity of three english oral language proficiency tests'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS