Keywords
language assessment
authentic
interactive
jumbled sentences
How to Cite
Number of views: 711
Number of downloads: 536
Abstract
Jumbled sentence items in language assessment have been criticized by some authors as inauthentic. However, unscrambling jumbled sentences is a common occurrence in real-world communication in English as a lingua franca. Naturalistic inquiry identified 54 instances of jumbled sentence use in daily life in Dubai/Sharjah, where English is widely used as a lingua franca. Thus it is seen that jumbled sentence test items can reflect real-world language use. To evaluate scrambled sentence test items, eight test item types developed from one jumbled sentence instance (“Want taxi Dubai you?”) were analyzed in terms of interactivity and authenticity. Items ranged from being completely decontextualized, non-interactive, and inauthentic to being fully contextualized, interactive, and authentic. To determine appropriate assessment standards for English tests in schools in this region, the English language standards for schools and English language requirements for university admission in the UAE were analyzed. Schools in Dubai/Sharjah use Inner Circle English varieties of English (e.g., British or American English) as the standard for evaluation, as well as non-native-English-speaker varieties (e.g., Indian English(es)). Also, students applying to English-medium universities in the UAE must meet the required scores on standardized English tests including the IELTS and TOEFL. Standards for evaluation of communication in English involving tasks of jumbled sentences in classroom tests must reflect the language learning goals of the school and community. Thus standards for classroom assessment of English in Dubai/Sharjah are determined by local schools’ and universities’ policies.
References
Admission tests. (n.d.). University of Sharjah. Retrieved from http://www.sharjah.ac.ae/English/Admissions/Pages/AdmissionRequirements.aspx
American University of Sharjah undergraduate catalogue. (2015-2016). American University of Sharjah. Retrieved from http://www.aus.edu/info/200144/information_and_support/343/university_catalogs#.TyLeIYGD_ct
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blackboard. (1997-2015). Blackboard Inc. Retrieved from http://www.blackboard.com/
Bolton, K. (2004). World Englishes. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 367-396). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Butler, G. (2009). The design of a postgraduate test of academic literacy: Accommodating student and supervisor perceptions. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 27(3), 291-300.
Canagarajah, S. (2006). An interview with Suresh Canagarajah. In R. Rubdy & M. Saraceni (Eds.), English in the world (pp. 200-212). London: Continuum.
CEPA – English. (2011-2012). National Admissions and Placement Office. Retrieved from http://ws1.mohesr.ae/cepa/CEPA_DET_EN.aspx?str=EN
Chapelle, C. A., Chung, Y-R, Hegelheimer, V., Pendar, N., & Xu, J. (2010). Towards a computer-delivered test of productive grammatical ability. Language Testing, 27(4), 443-469.
Chun, C. W. (2006). Commentary: An analysis of a language test for employment: The authenticity of the PhonePass test. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(3), 295-306.
CIA world factbook. (n.d.). Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/resources/the-world-factbook/
Connect series. (1995-2015). Esl.net. Retrieved from http://www.esl.net/connect.html
Davidson, F., Turner, C. E., & Huhta, A. (1997). Language testing standards. In C. Clapham, & D. Corson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education, Volume 7: Language testing and assessment (pp. 303-311). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
EIU country reports and profiles. (2012). Economist intelligence unit. Retrieved from www.eiu.com
Elder, C., & Davies, A. (2006). Assessing English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 26, 282-301.
Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
ELT Laura. (2013, May 12). Lexical Teaching Conference [Blog message]. Retrieved from https://eltlaura.wordpress.com/tag/michael-lewis/
English language requirements. (2016). University of Wollongong-Dubai. Retrieved from http://www.uowdubai.ac.ae/undergraduate-programs/admission-requirements#English%20Language%20Requirements
Eslami, Z. R., & Mirzaei, A. (2012). Assessment of second language pragmatics. In C. Coombe, P. Davidson, B. O’Sullivan, & S. Stoynoff (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language assessment (pp. 198-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Firth, A. (1996). The discursive accomplishment of normality. On “lingua franca” English and conversation analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 237-259.
Firth, A. (2009). Doing not being a foreign language learner: English as a lingua franca in the workplace and (some) implications for SLA. IRAL, 47(1), 127-156.
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 81, 285-300.
Fishman, J. A. (1972). Domains and the relationship between micro- and macrosociolinguistics. In J. Gumperz, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 435-453). Oxford: Blackwell.
Friedrich, P., & Matsuda, A. (2010). When five words are not enough. Journal of Multilingual Research, 4(1), 20-30.
Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 40(2), 97-118.
Gulf news picture. (n.d.). Gulfnews.com
Hot PotatoesTM. (n.d.). Hot Potatoes home page. Retrieved from http://hotpot.uvic.ca/index.php
Jenkins, J. (2006). The spread of EIL: A testing time for testers. ELT Journal, 60(1), 42-50.
Jumbled sentence worksheets. (n.d.). Eslprintables.com. Retrieved from http://www.eslprintables.com/grammar_worksheets/sentence_construction/jubled_sentences/
Killgallon, D. (1997). Sentence composing for middle school: A worktext on sentence variety and maturity. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Lexical Teaching Conference. (2013). Wordpress.com. Retrieved from https://eltlaura.wordpress.com/tag/michael-lewis
Lloyd, D., & Davidson, P. (2005). Optimizing students’ success on high-stakes examinations. In P. Davidson, C. Coombe, & W. Jones (Eds.), Assessment in the Arab world (pp. 323-336). Dubai: TESOL Arabia.
McKay, S. L. (2011). English as an international lingua franca pedagogy. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 122-139). New York: Routledge.
Mukundan, J. (2011). Modal auxiliary verbs in prescribed Malaysian English textbooks. English Language Teaching, 4(1), 79-89.
Ockey, G. (2009). Developments and challenges in the use of computer-based testing for assessing second language ability. Modern Language Journal, 93, 836-847.
Randall, M., & Samimi, M. A. (2010). The status of English in Dubai: Transition from Arabic to English as a lingua franca. English Today 101, 26(1), 43-50. doi:10.1017/S0266078409990617
Rearranging jumbled words to make sentences. (2015). Bbc.co.uk. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/skillswise/worksheet/en30stru-l1-w-jumbled-sentences/answers
Sailaja, P. (2009). Indian English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Shohamy, E. (2006). Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches. New York: Routledge.
Sifakis, N. C. (2004). Teaching EIL – International or Intercultural English? What teachers should know. System, 32, 237-250.
Smith, L. E., & Bisazza, J. A. (1982). The comprehensibility of three varieties of English for college students in seven countries. Language Learning, 32, 259-70.
The UAE has the highest number of international schools globally. (2015, August 17). UAE Interact. Retrieved from http://www.uaeinteract.com/docs/The_UAE_has_the_highest_number_of_international_schools_globally/70409.htm
Timmis, I. (2002). Native-speaker norms and international English: A classroom view. ELT Journal, 56(3), 241-249.
TOEFL. (2012). Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/toefl
TOEFL iBT® test questions. (2015). Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/toefl/ibt/prepare/test_questions
Undergraduate admissions. (2016). American University in Dubai. Retrieved from http://www.aud.edu/admission/en/menu/1886/before-applying#/admission/en/page/716/undergraduate-admissions-requirements
VersantTM English Test: Test description and validation summary. (2011). Pearson Education. Retrieved from http://www.versanttest.com/technology/VersantEnglishTestValidation.pdf
Watterson, M. (2008). Repair of non-understanding in English in international communication. World Englishes, 27(3/4), 378-406.
Wen, Q. (2012). English as a lingua franca: A pedagogical perspective. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 2, 371-378.
Yeh, H-C., & Yang, Y-F. (2011). Metacognitive process in online text construction. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 82-101.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.