The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessed Levels of Second Language Speaking Proficiency: How Distinct?
Abstract
The study reported in this paper is an investigation of the nature of speaking proficiency in English as a second language in the context of a larger project to develop a rating scale for a new international test of English for Academic Purposes, TOEFL iBT (Brown et al. 2005). We report on a large-scale study of the relationship between detailed features of the spoken language produced by test-takers and holistic scores awarded by raters to these performances. Spoken test performances representing five different tasks and five different proficiency levels (200 performances in all) were analyzed using a range of measures of grammatical accuracy and complexity, vocabulary, pronunciation, and fluency. The results showed that features from each category helped distinguish overall levels of performance, with particular features of vocabulary and fluency having the strongest impact. Overall, the study contributes important insights into the nature of spoken proficiency as it develops and can be measured in rating scales for speaking, and has implications for methodological issues of the appropriateness of the use in language testing research contexts of measures developed in research on second language acquisition.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Handbook of Qualitative Research
Crozier, G., Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121684 · Cited by 26,666
The Influence of Planning and Task Type on Second Language Performance
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100015047 · Cited by 1,147 · cited 4×
“In the studies of global accuracy reported in Foster and Skehan (1996) and Skehan and Foster (1999), no inter-coder reliability measures were reported.”
BackgroundInfluentialThe development of fluency in advanced learners of French
TOWELL, R., HAWKINS, R., & BAZERGUI, N. (1996) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/17.1.84 · Cited by 482
Cited by
Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/amp048 · Cited by 863
Defining and operationalising L2 complexity
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012) · Language Learning & Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/lllt.32.02bul · Cited by 587
The Relationship of Lexical Richness to the Quality of ESL Learners’ Oral Narratives
LU, X. (2012) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01232_1.x · Cited by 526
Relative salience of suprasegmental features on judgments of L2 comprehensibility and accentedness
Kang, O. (2010) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2010.01.005 · Cited by 327
What makes speech sound fluent? The contributions of pauses, speed and repairs
Bosker, H. R., Pinget, A.-F., Quené, H., Sanders, T., & de Jong, N. H. (2013) · Language Testing · doi:10.1177/0265532212455394 · Cited by 301
Metadata
- Authors
- Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O'Hagan, S.
- Venue
- Applied Linguistics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2007-07-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 24-49
- ISSN
- 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-450X
- OpenAlex
- W2115055261
- Cited by
- 409
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 37.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Assessed Levels of Second Language Speaking Proficiency: How Distinct? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/applin/amm017
- The paper
- Iwashita, N., Brown, A., McNamara, T., & O'Hagan, S. (2007). Assessed Levels of Second Language Speaking Proficiency: How Distinct? Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm017
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.