Journal of Beijing International Studies University ›› 2020, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (5): 32-45.DOI: 10.12002/j.bisu.299

• Foreign Language Education Studies • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Research on Validity and Validation of Language Proficiency Scales: A Review

Li Qinghua1(), Kong Shuo2()   

  1. 1. School of Foreign Studies, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China
    2. Shandong Water Conservancy Vocational College, Rizhao 276826, China
  • Received:2019-08-22 Online:2020-10-30 Published:2020-10-30

语言能力等级量表效度研究评述

李清华1(), 孔烁2()   

  1. 1.南方医科大学外国语学院,广州 510515
    2.山东水利职业学院,日照 276826
  • 作者简介:李清华,博士,南方医科大学教授,510515,研究方向:应用语言学。电子邮箱:lqhtesting@163.com
    孔烁,山东水利职业学院,276826,研究方向:计算语言学。电子邮箱:reedandbicycle@gmail.com
  • 基金资助:
    教育部人文社会科学研究项目“中国医学学术英语能力等级量表研究”部分成果(17YJA740021)

Abstract:

Language proficiency scales have played a significant role in national language strategy and language education. Recently, China’s Standards of English Language Ability (CSE) has drawn much attention from academia and the whole society. This paper reviews the current studies on validity and validation of language proficiency scales. It is revealed that most research has focused on one function of the scales—assessment tools. In terms of validity theory of language scales, two frameworks proposed by Zhu (2016) and Fang & Yang (2017) are discussed. Both frameworks hold that validity can be classified into several kinds, but they understand validity in different ways and apply different concepts to refer to the same validity. Comparison of these frameworks shows that Zhu (2016) and Fang & Yang (2017) each have their advantages and disadvantages. As for the experimental studies, interpretations of developing the scales and aligning them to other scales and tests have attracted the most effort. Discussion on the theoretical and experimental research of language scales leads us to propose potential future directions. On the one hand, it seems necessary to integrate the two current frameworks into a new model of validation of language proficiency scales that considers scale characteristics under the guidance of validity theory acknowledged in the educational and psychological measurements and language testing. On the other hand, it is arguable that descriptors of learners’ real language behaviors should come from collecting and selecting real data from a large group of language users rather than the subjective judgment of experts, teachers, and students, mainly because the subjective evaluation might not be fully reliable. Furthermore, CSE and other well-known language scales all boast that they should be used as standards on which language tests can be developed. Therefore it is an open question to what extent validity theories of language testing can be applied to validating language scales.

Keywords: language proficiency scales; language testing; language education; validation; China’s Standards of English Language Ability (CSE)

摘要:

语言能力量表在国家语言战略和语言教育中发挥着重大作用,2018年发布的《中国英语能力等级量表》(CSE)已经成为社会和学界关注的热点。本文在对量表效度研究进行梳理后发现,现有研究大多仅围绕量表的测评用途展开。在理论探索方面,朱正才(2016)方绪军、杨惠中(2017)提出了各自的效度验证框架。两个框架均持分类效度观,但所用概念名称不尽相同,种类略有差别,各有优势和不足。在量表效度验证方面,已有研究主要集中在量表的解读和对接方面。在这些研究中,对学习者真实语言行为的描述多来自专家、教师和学生的主观判断,这些数据的可靠性有待验证。因此,笔者认为有必要在教育与心理测量和语言测试领域效度理论指导下,针对语言能力量表的特点,进一步整合量表效度验证框架。对已有量表的效度验证和新量表研发应从对语言使用者的调查转到基于大规模语言使用者语料库的研究上来。必须指出,CSE等国内外著名语言能力量表均定位为“标准”,而“标准”的语言能力量表是语言测试开发的基础,所以语言测试的效度理论在多大程度上适用于能力量表值得进一步讨论。

关键词: 语言能力等级量表, 语言测试, 语言教育, 效度验证, 中国英语能力等级量表

CLC Number: