Cited by 59EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningEnglish Language Learning and TeachingEducational Technology and Assessment

TRENDS IN COMPUTER-BASED SECOND LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT

Jamieson, Joan·2005·Annual Review of Applied Linguistics

Abstract

In the last 20 years, several authors have described the possible changes that computers may effect in language testing. Since ARAL's last review of general language testing trends (Clapham, 2000), authors in the Cambridge Language Assessment Series have offered various visions of how computer technology could alter the testing of second language skills. This chapter reflects these perspectives as it charts the paths recently taken in the field. Initial steps were made in the conversion of existing item types and constructs already known from paper-and- pencil testing into formats suitable for computer delivery. This conversion was closely followed by the introduction of computer-adaptive tests, which aim to make more, and perhaps, better, use of computer capabilities to tailor tests more closely to individual abilities and interests. Movement toward greater use of computers in assessment has been coupled with an assumption that computer-based tests should be better than their traditional predecessors, and some related steps have been taken. Corpus linguistics has provided tools to create more authentic assessments; the quest for authenticity has also motivated inclusion of more complex tasks and constructs. Both these innovations have begun to be incorporated into computer-based language tests. Natural language processing has also provided some tools for computerized scoring of essays, particularly relevant in large-scale language testing programs. Although computer use has not revolutionized all aspects of language testing, recent efforts have produced some of the research, technological advances, and improved pedagogical understanding needed to support progress.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0267190505000127

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jamieson, J.
Corresponding author
Jamieson, Joan
Venue
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
Published
2005-03
Volume
25
Pages
228-242
ISSN
  • 0267-1905 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6356
OpenAlex
W2131477431
Cited by
59
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
8.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and Assessment
Keywords
computer-based language testing, second language assessment, computerized adaptive testing, paper-and-pencil tests, authenticity in assessment, natural language processing, automated essay scoring, computerized scoring

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review