Testing L2 Talk: A Review of Empirical Studies on Second-Language Oral Proficiency Testing <s> The OPI Compared to other Test Conditions <s> This study, framed within sociocultural theory, examines the interaction of adult ESL test-takers in two tests of oral proficiency: one in which they interacted with an examiner (the individual format) and one in which they interacted with another student (the paired format). The data for the eight pairs in this study were drawn from a larger study comparing the two test formats in the context of high-stakes exit testing from an Academic Preparation Program at a large Canadian university. All of the test-takers participated in both test formats involving a discussion with comparable speaking prompts. The findings from the quantitative analyses show that overall the test-takers performed better in the paired format in that their scores were on average higher than when they interacted with an examiner. Qualitative analysis of the test-takers' speaking indicates that the differences in performance in the two test formats were more marked than the scores suggest. When test-takers interacted with other student... <s> BIB001 </s> Testing L2 Talk: A Review of Empirical Studies on Second-Language Oral Proficiency Testing <s> The OPI Compared to other Test Conditions <s> Abstract This study aims to discuss role-play activity in oral proficiency interviews (OPIs) in terms of its construct validity; that is, whether it correlates with what it is supposed to measure. The data for the analysis were obtained from 71 role-play activities conducted during an OPI. The analysis is based on conversation analytic (CA) methodology and invokes the analytic frameworks of interactive footing and interactional competencies. Conversational analyses performed on the data revealed that candidates executed not only the role-play instructions but also the interviewers’ explicit and implicit requirements of the next desirable action. In doing so, candidates employed and displayed their interactional competencies in role-play interactions. The role-play activity in the OPI being managed by the interviewer created an asymmetrical relationship between the interviewers and the candidates in terms of speaking rights (i.e., turn-taking and topical organization). Nevertheless, competencies that candidates displayed in performing a role-play activity did not seem different from those employed in ordinary conversations. Thus, role-play activity in OPIs, if recognized as an interactional phenomenon co-constructed by participants’ display of their turn-by-turn practical evaluation of each other's actions, seems to be a valid instrument for assessing the candidates’ performance of the given tasks. <s> BIB002
In a second set of studies, the OPI is compared to other test constructs/conditions, such as roleplays (e.g., Halleck 2007; Hüttner 2014; Lorenzo-Dus & Meara 2004) or paired formats BIB001 ).  findings result in a critique of dialogic role-play tasks as valid measures of a candidate's oral proficiency because of the dominant role in constructing the test discourse played by the examiner. Similarly, BIB002 investigates role-plays in high-stake OPIs, concluding that role-plays are not necessarily a better option as compared to OPIs in the sense that the interviewer to a large extent organizes turn-taking as well as topic initiation. However, Okada's study also demonstrates some positive aspects of role-plays; they may offer opportunities for test-takers to display a variety of interactional competencies as well as different discursive identities.