Testing L2 Talk: A Review of Empirical Studies on Second-Language Oral Proficiency Testing <s> DISCOURSE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION IN THE PAIRED FORMAT <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> DISCOURSE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION IN THE PAIRED FORMAT <s> Speaking tasks involving peer-to-peer candidate interaction are increasingly being incorporated into language proficiency assessments, in both large-scale international testing contexts, and in smaller-scale, for example course-related, ones. This growth in the popularity and use of paired and group orals has stimulated research, particularly into the types of discourse produced and the possible impact of candidate background factors on performance. However, despite the fact that the strongest argument for the validity of peer-to-peer assessment lies in the claim that such tasks allow for the assessment of a broader range of interactional skills than the more traditional interview-format tests do, there is surprisingly little research into the judgments that are made of such performances. The fact that raters, and rating criteria, are in a crucial mediating position between output and outcomes, warrants investi gation into how raters construe the interaction in these tasks. Such investigations have the potential to inform the development of interaction-based rating scales and ensure that validity claims are moved beyond the content level to the construct level. This paper reports the findings of a verbal protocol study of teacher-raters viewing the paired test discourse of 17 beginner dyads in a university-based Spanish as a foreign language course. The findings indicate that the raters identified three interaction parameters: non-verbal interpersonal communication, interactive listening, and interactional management. The findings have implications for our understanding of the construct of effective interaction in paired candidate speaking tests, and for the development of appropriate rating scales. <s> BIB002 </s> Testing L2 Talk: A Review of Empirical Studies on Second-Language Oral Proficiency Testing <s> DISCOURSE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION IN THE PAIRED FORMAT <s> While disagreements are often considered dispreferred choices and potentially face-threatening acts due to their oppositional nature, this perception does not adequately reflect the importance of disagreeing for many types of interaction, such as problem-solving and decision-making. Developing ability in performing this speech act therefore becomes relevant for learners of an L2 in order to show achievements in such general language learning targets as expressing and defending opinions and arguments, as well as negotiating consensual decisions. This paper presents a sequential analysis of disagreements in assessed interactions of advanced German-speaking learners of English, observed in three different exam formats, i.e. teacher-led interview, role play with teacher and paired student interaction. Overall, 33 disagreement episodes were identified in 18 oral exams. Findings show that the choice of examination format constrains range and type of disagreement trajectory enacted by the learners, highlighting ... <s> BIB003
Studies focusing on interaction in paired OP tests increased toward the end of our time period. A few studies compare OPIs with the paired format (e.g., BIB001 BIB003 , and a general finding of these studies -other than that the test format affects test performance -seems to be that the paired format allows for more f lexible candidate contributions and a wider range of more complex actions and negotiations of meaning. As mentioned, although it has been argued that peer-peer interaction resembles natural conversation, the challenge with the paired format has to do with assessment: individual scoring of a jointly accomplished 'product' (the test interaction) is problematic. In light of this problem, Ducasse (2010: 1) argues that not enough is known about what takes place in the interaction between students in a paired oral proficiency test, and as a consequence, no rating scales have been developed based directly on empirical data from observed performances of such interactions. Her study included rater and candidate perceptions of salient features of successful peer interaction (cf. also  May , 2011a  and the development of a rating scale based on recordings and analysis of peer interaction. The study is mainly focused on how features such as 'interactive listening', 'non-verbal communication', and 'interactional management' were salient to both raters and candidates viewing their test partner's performance and on how these features can be incorporated into rating procedures. Despite the repeated mention of peer interaction, the study does not rely upon analysis of the test discourse in itself (cf. also BIB002 ).