Assessing Second Language Listening Over the Past Twenty Years: A Review Within the Socio-Cognitive Framework

Abstract

The assessment of second language (L2) listening has received much attention. To understand the state-of-the-art research on L2 listening assessment, a total of 87 studies published in 14 peer-reviewed journals and two research report series between 2001 and 2020 were reviewed, using the socio-cognitive framework for developing and validating listening tests proposed by Weir (2005). Thirteen research themes were identified in relation to the six components of the framework, including test-taker characteristics, cognitive validity, context validity, scoring validity, consequential validity, and criterion-related validity. Context validity was the most investigated component, covering three research themes, that is, task setting, linguistic demands (input and output), and speakers. Based on a detailed analysis of the 13 research themes, recommendations for future research in L2 listening assessment were given.

Developing a second language listening and speaking assessment instrument for Use in student-led seminars in a chinese middle school english language acquisition class

“…Calls for changes to listening assessment have occurred for the past two decades with little development in instructional and assessment practices (He & Jiang, 2020). There remains a gap between authentic language and textbook language (Gilmore, 2007).…”

“…A review of 87 listening research studies demonstrated for the past 20 years researchers are still calling for an increase in assessment authenticity emphasizing real-world contexts (He & Jiang, 2020). In the Chinese context, university students have discussed how they were unprepared for their professors' different English-speaking accents and the need to adapt their listening skills (Noman et al, 2023).…”

Are subtitles useful for language learners?

“…There are also issues with comprehension assessments. For example, though assessments were included in their reporting, the sole use of MCQ in Chen et al (2022) and Aldukhayel (2021) may have led to construct underrepresentation (He & Jiang, 2020). Although Dizon & Thanyawatpokin (2021) assessed both global and detailed understanding using a variety of response methods, these tests were not included in reporting.…”

The typology of second language listening constructs: A systematic review

“…Although progress has been made in identifying specific constructs (e.g., Gu & Yan, 2010), these attempts are inadequate for constructing a satisfactory typology of listening constructs in L2 assessment. Previous reviews, such as those by He and Jiang (2020) and Taylor and Geranpayeh (2011), although extensive, have several limitations. First, they provide narrative accounts of past approaches to testing listening rather than a comprehensive search of L2 listening constructs.…”