The grammatical competence of a 'direct' test and a 'semi-direct' test of Chinese speaking proficiency. (Volumes I-III)

The purpose of this study is to examine the compatibility and validity of two types of speaking tests: a direct test (Oral Proficiency Interview) and a semi-direct test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview: Chinese Speaking Test) from a grammatical competence perspective. The concurrent validation of these two tests was completed, and the results showed a high correlation/coefficient. Thus, the Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview (SOPI) is considered an appropriate and effective alternative to the Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI). However, as correlations can be interpreted in many ways, correlations by themselves cannot always provide sufficient evidence that two tests measure the same language performance.;To investigate the grammatical aspect of language performance by examinees, the statistical analysis is made of the following aspects: the overall frequency of errors, frequency of errors by level, and types of grammatical errors occurring in the OPI and the SOPI.;The statistical analysis of the data from the two types of tests is performed by using a pair-wise t test analysis. The statistical results indicated that the two types of tests were not totally compatible in terms of the grammatical aspect of language performance. At the intermediate and the advanced levels, the OPI and the SOPI were quite compatible. At the superior level, they were less compatible. Language samples from both types of tests yielded errors in all 14 grammatical structures investigated, and the SOPI consistently yielded more grammatical information than the OPI. Furthermore, the statistical results revealed that the examinees' ratings did not seem to correspond to the description in the ACTFL/ILR Chinese proficiency guidelines. Examinees at every level of proficiency made errors in virtually all grammatical structures. The differences among the levels lay in the degree of accuracy. More data analyses which include larger samples of performance would be useful. The level descriptions in the ACTFL/ILR speaking proficiency guidelines should be revised.