This study contrasts the effects of two distinct ways of respon ding to a student essay: discrete-item attention to form and holistic feedback on meaning. In examining the before- and after-essays of a linguistically diverse group of 26 college freshmen, it shows that the use of a holistic response is likely to increase a student's awareness of sentence boundaries more than the alternative. In other words, responding to content results in improvements in grammatical accu racy. General implications are also addressed.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of two complementary approaches to assessing the validity of the TOEFL examination. One approach used evidence based on test content. In the context described in this report, evidence based on test content refers to the degree to which the items on the TOEFL examination are representative of the knowledge and skills required to demonstrate English proficiency in undergraduate and graduate programs throughout the United States and Canada. The content-oriented approach used in this pilot study involved item rating procedures that were designed to evaluate and document the relationship between the language tasks or behaviors previously identified as important for academic success and the test items used to measure them. The second approach used a criterion-related validation strategy. In this aspect of the study, experimental rating scales were developed for use by faculty to evaluate students' current levels of English language proficiency. These scales were designed to sample the domain of behaviors previously identified as important.Key words: validity, language testing, rating scales ii The Test of English as a Foreign Language™ (TOEFL®) was developed in 1963 by the National Council on the Testing of English as a Foreign Language. The Council was formed through the cooperative effort of more than 30 public and private organizations concerned with testing the English proficiency of nonnative speakers of the language applying for admission to institutions in the United States. In 1965, Educational Testing Service® (ETS®) and the College Board® assumed joint responsibility for the program. In 1973, a cooperative arrangement for the operation of the program was entered into by ETS, the College Board, and the Graduate Record Examinations® (GRE®) Board. The membership of the College Board is composed of schools, colleges, school systems, and educational associations. GRE Board members are associated with graduate education.ETS administers the TOEFL program under the general direction of a policy board that was established by, and is affiliated with, the sponsoring organizations. Members of the TOEFL Board represent the College Board, the GRE Board, and such institutions and agencies as graduate schools of business, junior and community colleges, nonprofit educational exchange agencies, and agencies of the United States government.A continuing program of research related to the TOEFL test is carried out under the direction of the TOEFL Committee of Examiners. Its 13 members include representatives of the TOEFL Board, and distinguished English as a second language specialists from the academic community. The Committee meets twice yearly to oversee the review and approval of proposals for test-related research and to set guidelines for the entire scope of the TOEFL research program. Members of the Committee of Examiners serve three-year terms at the invitation of the Board; the chair of the committee serves on the Board.Because the studies are specific...

communication activities; and reading extensively out of class. These findings confirm recommendations made by several studies (Rubin 1975, Stern 1975, Naiman, Fröhlich, Stern, and Todesco 1978) of the learning strategies of good language learners. The findings also indicate that good learners, especially those at intermediate and advanced stages, exhibit a high level of independence and that motivation plays a very important role. In addition, the findings show that good language learners in China are in many respects similar to good language learners elsewhere. The interviews revealed a number of interesting similarities and differences in language learning behavior. While good language learners did not all use the same techniques, those they used were all functional in nature and directed at meaning. Also, while these learners were all highly motivated, the reasons for their motivation to learn English varied, as did their language learning histories. For the poorer learners, the cause of low motivation was generally the same-for example, failure to pass the examinations for science majors, followed by a change to an English major-but the learning techniques they used differed considerably. One student reported trying to use strategies employed by a good language learner and finding them unsuitable. This and other findings suggest the complexity and sometimes idiosyncratic character of foreign language learning processes.

AbstractThis study compares the acquisitional states of two groups of foreign language learners (a Francophone group learning English and an Anglophone group learning French) with a view to establishing the influence of Universal Grammar in the process. Specifically, the two groups (48 each) were asked to render acceptability judgments about 50 sentences in each language; the sentences exemplified syntactic properties [the permissability or impermissibility of fully tensed clausal complements, Exceptional Case Marking and Control structures (PRO)] associated with three verbs in the two languages (believe/croire,promise/promettreandwant/vouloir).

No abstract