语言能力评估的社会维度

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (1)

输出:BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要

本文从语言规划视角出发，讨论语言能力评估的社会应用，目的在于揭示隐藏在语言技术功能背后的象征性本质，从而为读者提供理解语言能力的另一个视角。文章简要综述了语言能力测试的历史进程，展示了海外学术界对语言能力评估在研究理念上发生的两次重大转变，即由关注被试者对语言本体结构知识的掌握到对在特定场景中实际交际能力的强调；由聚焦测试效度描述语言能力的客观准确性到对应用测试结果及所产生的社会影响的关心。基于对海外语言测试领域有关语言能力测试结果社会应用研究文献的调查，本文整理讨论了施测者或政府利用语言能力评估实现各自教育或政治目的四个主要的社会维度。文章结合中国实际情况，探讨了该领域发展的国际趋势对中国相关领域研究的启示。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	杨旸赵守辉

关键词 ：语言评估, 社会结果, 心理测量, 效度, 反拨

Abstract：

Language is embedded in society. As a symbolic capital, language also serves as the main component of the human resource.The use of language assessments thus has significant consequences for individuals’ material life and personal fates. Accordingly,language assessments will inevitably become a means for resources management and social control exploited by governments. Through examining the use of language assessments from the perspective of language planning and policy study, this paper attempts to unpackthe symbolic nature of language under its technical attributes, thus providing Chinese audience with a new perspective of understanding language proﬁciency. In this paper, based on a succinct review of the international literature on the developing trajectory of languagetesting and evaluation, we ﬁrst show the two milestone changes occurred in the theories of the language testing study, i.e. a shift offocus from measuring linguistic knowledge and language forms of test takers to their pragmatic skills in the actual communicationsettings, and a shift of concern from the objectivity and accuracy of validity of the test battery to the impact of social application of thetest results. Drawing upon the vast investigation of the international literature about social applications of language testing, the paperthen identifies and discusses the four main social dimensions of how language assessments being utilized by testing authorities orgovernments to achieve their educational or political ends. In the closing part, we further unravel the very nature underlying the socialdimensions of language assessments, and explore the implications of the international trends in this ﬁeld for Chinese researchers andpractitioners.

Key words： language assessments social consequences psychometrics validity washback

通讯作者: 杨旸，女，武汉大学与卑尔根大学联合培养博士生，主要研究方向为语言教育与政策。赵守辉，男，卑尔根大学外语系副教授，主要研究方向为语言教育与政策。

引用本文:

杨旸赵守辉. 语言能力评估的社会维度[J]. 语言战略研究, 2016, 1(5): 20-27.
Yang Yang and Zhao Shouhui. Assessing Language Proﬁ ciency: From Perspective of Social Dimensions. , 2016, 1(5): 20-27.

	陈平 2008 《语言民族主义：欧洲与中国》，《外语教学与研究》第1期。
	戴曼纯 2002 《外语能力的界定及其应用》，《外语教学与研究》第6期。
	何莲珍、吕洲洋 2013 《语言测试研究的新视角：批评语言测试》，《浙江大学学报》（人文社会科学版）第6期。
	黄倩 2013 《语言测试社会维度之社会影响研究——基于大学英语四、六级考试的分析》，西北大学硕士学位论文。
	楼荷英 2014 《配对（组）口语测试的社会性及其微观研究》，《浙江工业大学学报》（社会科学版）第2期。
	王立群 2009a 《教育社会学视角下的语言测试社会维度》，《无锡商业职业技术学院学报》第2期。
	王立群 2009b 《美国托福考试的社会维度分析及其启示》，《江西电力职业技术学院学报》第2期。
	王立群 2011 《托福考试社会维度分析——兼谈大学英语四、六级考试》，《衡水学院学报》第2期。
	杨秀芬 2015 《语言测试的效度研究：回顾与展望》，《景德镇学院学报》第4期。
	张艳 2014 《语言测试的道德维度：研究理路与实践反思》，《江海学刊》第6期。
	Bachman, Lyle F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	Bachman, Lyle F. 2004. Statistical Analysis of Language Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
	Bachman, Lyle F. and Adrian S. Palmer. 1996. Language Testing in Practice: Designing and Developing Useful Language Tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	Blackledge, Adrian. 2009. Inventing English as Convenient Fiction: Language Testing Regimes in the United Kingdom.In Guus Extra, Massimiliano Spotti, and Piet Van Avermaet(eds.). Language Testing, Migration and Citizenship:Crossnational Perspectives on Integration Regimes. NewYork: Continuum.
	Canagarajah, Suresh. 2009. The Plurilingual Tradition and theEnglish Language in South Asia. AILA Review 22, 5-22.
	Canale, Michael and Merrill Swain. 1980. The oretical Bases ofCommunicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics 1(1), 1-47.
	Canale, Michael. 1983. From Communicative Competence toCommunicative Language Pedagogy. In Jack C. Richardsand Richard W. Schmidt (eds.). Language and Communication. London: Longman.
	Carroll, John Bissell. 1961. Fundamental Considerations in Testing for English Language Pro?ciency of Foreign Students. In Harold B. Allen and Russell N. Campbell (eds.).Testing the English Pro?ciency of Foreign Students. Washington, D. C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
	Chomsky, Noam. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.
	Cooper, Robert L. 1968. An Elaborated Language Testing Model. Language Learning 18, 57-72.
	Evan, Bruce A. and Nancy H. Hornberger. 2005. No Child LeftBehind: Repealing and Unpeeling Federal Language Education Policy in the United States. Language Policy 4(1),87-106.
	Filer, Ann. 2000. Introduction. In Ann Filer (ed.). Assessment:Social Practice and Social Product. London: Routledge.
	Fulcher, Glenn. 2009. Test Use and Political Philosophy. AnnualReview of Applied Linguistics 29, 3-20.
	Hymes, Dell. 1972. Models of the Interaction of Language andSocial Life. In John Joseph Gumperz and Dell H. Hymes(eds.). Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography ofCommunication. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
	Lowenberg, Peter H. 1993. Issues of Validity in Tests of Englishas a World Language: Whose Standards? World Englishes12, 95-106.
	Mc Namara, Tim. 2000. Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	Mc Namara, Tim. 2005. 21st Century Shibboleth: LanguageTests, Identity and Intergroup Conflict. Language Policy4(4), 351-370.
	Mc Namara, Tim and Carsten Roever. 2006. Language Testing:The Social Dimension. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
	Menken, Kate. 2005. When the Test Is What Counts: How High-Stakes Testing Affects Language Policy and the Education of English Language Learners in High School. Doctoral Dissertation. Teachers College, Columbia University.
	Menken, Kate. 2006. Teaching to the Test: How StandardizedTesting Promoted by the No Child Left Behind Act Impacts Language Policy, Curriculum, and Instruction forEnglish Language Learners. Bilingual Research Journal30(2), 521-546.
	Messick, Samuel J. 1989. Validity. In Robert Linn (ed.). Educational Measurement (3rd edition). New York: Macmillan.
	Nygren-Junkin, Lilian. 2009. Language, Migration and Citizenship in Sweden: Still a Test-Free Zone. In Guus Extra,Massimiliano Spotti, and Piet Van Avermaet (eds.). Language Testing, Migration and Citizenship, Cross-NationalPerspectives on Integration Regimes. New York: Continuum.
	Shohamy, Elana．2001．The Power of Tests: A Critical Perspective of the Uses of Language Tests. London: Pearson Education.
	Shohamy, Elana. 2004. Assessment in Multicultural Societies:Applying Democratic Principles and Practices to Language Testing. In Bonny Norton and Kelleen Toohey (eds.).Critical Pedagogies and Language Learning. New York/London: Cambridge University Press.
	Shohamy, Elana. 2006. Language Policy: Hidden Agendas andNew Approaches. London: Routledge.
	Shohamy, Elana. 2007. Language Tests as Language PolicyTools. Assessment in Education 14(1), 117-130.
	Shohamy, Elana and Tzahi Kanza. 2009. Language and Citizenship in Israel. Language Assessment Quarterly 6(1), 83-88.
	Spolsky, Bernard. 1978. Linguistics and Language Testers. InBernard Spolsky (ed.). Papers in Applied Linguistics:Advances in Language Testing (Series 2). Arlington: The Center for Applied Linguistics.
	Spolsky, Bernard. 1994. Policy Issues in Testing and Evaluation. The Annals of the American Academy of Politicaland Social Science 532, 226-237.
	Spolsky, Bernard. 1995. Measured Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
	Young, Richard F. 2012. Social Dimensions of LanguageTesting. In Glenn Fulcher and Fred Davidson (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Language Testing. New York:Routledge.