Utilizing Psychometric Methods in Assessment

Chalhoub‐Deville, Micheline; Deville, Craig

doi:10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_177

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In terms of language testing, for example, Bachman (1998) showed in his study that qualitative research results provide the relationship of information processing with performance specifically and deeply. Chalhoub-Deville and Deville (2008), too, argued that qualitative approaches are employed to achieve deeper insights into issues related to designing, administering, and interpreting language assessment.…”

Section: Advantagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Language “Testing and Assessment” Research: A Literature Review

Rahman¹

2016

JEL

499

253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The researchers of various disciplines often use qualitative and quantitative research methods and approaches for their studies. Some of these researchers like to be known as qualitative researchers; others like to be regarded as quantitative researchers. The researchers, thus, are sharply polarised; and they involve in a competition of pointing out the benefits of their own preferred methods and approaches. But, both the methods and approaches (qualitative and quantitative) have pros and cons. This study, therefore, aims to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative and quantitative research approaches and methods in language testing and assessment research. There is a focus on ethical considerations too. The study found some strengths of using qualitative methods for language "assessment and testing" research-such as, eliciting deeper insights into designing, administering, and interpreting assessment and testing; and exploring test-takers' behaviour, perceptions, feelings, and understanding. Some weaknesses are, for instance, smaller sample size and time consuming. Quantitative research methods, on the other hand, involve a larger sample, and do not require relatively a longer time for data collection. Some limitations are that quantitative research methods take snapshots of a phenomenon: not in-depth, and overlook test-takers' and testers' experiences as well as what they mean by something. Among these two research paradigms, the quantitative one is dominant in the context of language testing and assessment research.

show abstract

Section: Advantagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Language “Testing and Assessment” Research: A Literature Review

Rahman¹

2016

JEL

499

253

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, an abstract analysis conducted by Hamp-Lyons and Lynch (1998) using data from the Language Testing Research Colloquium from 1979 to 1994, revealed that studies on validity in language assessment reflected predominantly postpositivist thinking at the time with a strong dependence on psychometric methods to support claims of validity. Similarly, Chalhoub-Deville and Deville (2008) conducted an analysis of articles in the two major language assessment journals (i.e., Language Assessment and Language Assessment Quarterly ) from their beginnings to 2005, and concluded that quantitative research approaches were dominantly used in the publications.…”

Section: A Brief Overview Of Methodological Expansion In Language Assmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This strong orientation toward quantitative research methodology stems from the dominant research interest in language assessment revolving around the development of score-valid and score-reliable large-scale standardized tests (Chalhoub-Deville & Deville, 2008; Hamp-Lyons & Lynch, 1998). Hamp-Lyons (2000), describing the developments in the philosophy and epistemology of language testing, stated that the epistemology of early language tests was shaped by a faith in psychometrics and positivism due to a strong influence from intelligence tests.…”

Section: A Brief Overview Of Methodological Expansion In Language Assmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since the late 1990s, however, due to epistemological changes in second language acquisition research and the increasing awareness that any language assessment cannot be separated from the context, culture, and values of where it was created and used (McNamara, 2001), hermeneutic and qualitative approaches have been adopted to gain deeper insights into issues concerning designing, administering, and interpreting language assessment (Banerjee & Luoma, 1997; Chalhoub-Deville & Deville, 2008). This reflects the general methodological development in language education, which can be characterized regarding a philosophical position shift from a postpositivist worldview toward interpretive (Mezirow, 1996; Moss, 1996) or interpretivist (Lynch & Shaw, 2005) approaches.…”

Section: A Brief Overview Of Methodological Expansion In Language Assmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, even though MM research has become more common in many disciplines including education, in language assessment, this approach does not seem to be as prevalent as do the other two paradigms as of yet. In an article on journal archive analysis, Chalhoub-Deville and Deville (2008) reported that the number of qualitative research articles published in the two major language assessment journals were increasing very slowly. Similarly, in the field of education, Stapleton and Collett (2010) in ELT, and Truscott et al (2010) in general education observed a considerably small number of MM research study articles in their journals.…”

Section: General Challenges Of Conducting MM Research In Classroomsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Methodological Diversity in Language Assessment Research: The Role of Mixed Methods in Classroom-Based Language Assessment Studies

Tsushima

2015

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although an epistemic change often is labeled as a shift, some researchers representing the social sciences consider this paradigm shift as a paradigm expansion (e.g., Pollack, 2007) because epistemological and methodological diversity allows researchers to address a wider range of questions. The third paradigm, mixed methods (MM) research, is claimed to provide a more holistic picture of a research problem by combining two different data sourcesquantitative and qualitative-in a single study (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007;Greene, 2007;Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009). This article discusses how mixed methods research approaches have been used to enrich the results and to enhance the rigor of classroom-based language assessment investigations, drawing on both the language testing and assessment (hereafter, language assessment) and classroom assessment literature in second language education. The article opens with a brief overview of the methodological evolution in language assessment research. Then, focusing on MM research studies that investigated various facets of classroom-based language assessment (CBLA) practices, the main part of this article outlines a proposal of MM methodology as an appropriate methodology for research on CBLA, particularly in a context where a new form of assessment is implemented. The article closes with a discussion of challenges that MM researchers might face, and a proposal of MM research methodology as an appropriate research approach for CBLA scholars, especially in settings where both the validation of assessment and the explanation of the phenomenon are required.

show abstract

Recent developments in language assessment and the case of four large-scale tests of ESOL ability

Stoynoff¹

2009

Lang. Teach.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review article surveys recent developments and validation activities related to four large-scale tests of L2 English ability: the iBT TOEFL, the IELTS, the FCE, and the TOEIC. In addition to describing recent changes to these tests, the paper reports on validation activities that were conducted on the measures. The results of this research constitute some of the evidence available to support claims that these tests are suitable for their intended purposes. The discussion is organized on the basis of a framework that considers test purpose, selected test method characteristics, and important aspects of test usefulness.

show abstract

Utilizing Psychometric Methods in Assessment

Cited by 9 publications

References 22 publications

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Language “Testing and Assessment” Research: A Literature Review

The Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Language “Testing and Assessment” Research: A Literature Review

Methodological Diversity in Language Assessment Research: The Role of Mixed Methods in Classroom-Based Language Assessment Studies

Recent developments in language assessment and the case of four large-scale tests of ESOL ability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About