The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction
Abstract
Within the fields of applied linguistics and language testing, there has been a recent interest in rating scales, and how rating scales are constructed (Upshur and Turner, 1995). This is not surprising, as there is increasing concern that scores from language tests should be meaningful in applied linguistics terms. However, applied linguistics research and second language acquisition research have done little to provide descriptions of language abilities or performances which can be operationalized by language testers. Many existing descriptors for bands in rating scales are therefore barely tenable as definitions of constructs. This article looks at the definition of fluency in the literature, and proposes a qualitative and quantitative approach which may be used to produce a 'thick' description of language use, which can be used in rating scale construction. A fluency rating scale is described, and its reliability and validity assessed. The arti cle suggests that validity considerations must be addressed in the construction phase of developing rating scales, through the careful consideration of the linguis tic meaning of constructs, rather than merely as a post hoc enterprise.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
Cited by
Exploring measures and perceptions of fluency in the speech of second language learners
Kormos, J., & Dénes (2004) · System · doi:10.1016/j.system.2004.01.001 · Cited by 679
Task-Based Language Teaching: Theory and Practice
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019) · doi:10.1017/9781108643689 · Cited by 407
KANG, O., RUBIN, D., & PICKERING, L. (2010) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01091.x · Cited by 347
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
Kahng, J. (2014) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12084 · Cited by 200
Metadata
- Authors
- Fulcher, G.
- Venue
- Language Testing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1996-07
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 208-238
- ISSN
- 0265-5322 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0946
- OpenAlex
- W2106962656
- Cited by
- 213
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 28.84
- 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: Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/026553229601300205
- The paper
- Fulcher, G. (1996). Does thick description lead to smart tests? A data-based approach to rating scale construction. Language Testing. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229601300205
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.