Loading…

The B2 Level and the Dream of a Common Standard

In Flanders, Belgium, university admission of undergraduate international L2 students requires a certificate of an accredited test of Dutch. The two main university entrance tests used for certification share highly comparable oral components and CEFR-based oral rating criteria. This article discuss...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Language assessment quarterly 2018-01, Vol.15 (1), p.44-58
Main Authors: Deygers, Bart, Van Gorp, Koen, Demeester, Thomas
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63
container_end_page 58
container_issue 1
container_start_page 44
container_title Language assessment quarterly
container_volume 15
creator Deygers, Bart
Van Gorp, Koen
Demeester, Thomas
description In Flanders, Belgium, university admission of undergraduate international L2 students requires a certificate of an accredited test of Dutch. The two main university entrance tests used for certification share highly comparable oral components and CEFR-based oral rating criteria. This article discusses to what extent ratings on the oral components of these tests can be compared. The data used are the ratings of the oral performances of the same 82 candidates on both oral test components, which were administered within the same week. The correlation on the overall scores is high, but lower on the oral test component. Further analyses, including linear regression and multifaceted Rasch analysis, indicate that the B2 level was interpreted differently in the two tests. The results show that using the same language proficiency scales as the basis for rating scale criteria may lead to superficial correspondences or a perceived equivalence but does not necessarily lead to greater comparability of shared criteria. The findings of this study are especially useful for contexts in which different tests use similar criteria that are based on the same descriptors, and comparability is only assumed.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/15434303.2017.1421955
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2008014998</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1171988</ericid><sourcerecordid>2008014998</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwCJUscU7rtZ3auQGl_KkSB8rZcmJHpEriYqdUfXscpfTIaVe73-xoB6EJkCkQSWaQcsYZYVNKQEyBU8jS9AyN-nnCGcD5qSfsEl2FsCGECpGREZqtvyx-oHhlf2yNdWtwFweP3uoGuxJrvHBN41r80cWd9uYaXZS6DvbmWMfo82m5Xrwkq_fn18X9Kim4YF1SCKopNfOcZ1IIIjVoIbnOeU4tBwNpySA3Wc4gY_Nc5hHlwsiIZykVxZyN0e1wd-vd986GTm3czrfRUlESn4ZIykilA1V4F4K3pdr6qtH-oICoPhv1l43qs1HHbKJuMuisr4qTZvkGICCT_d27YV-1pfON3jtfG9XpQ-186XVbVEGx_y1-ARZpcC0</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2008014998</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The B2 Level and the Dream of a Common Standard</title><source>ERIC</source><source>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</source><source>Taylor and Francis:Jisc Collections:Taylor and Francis Read and Publish Agreement 2024-2025:Social Sciences and Humanities Collection (Reading list)</source><creator>Deygers, Bart ; Van Gorp, Koen ; Demeester, Thomas</creator><creatorcontrib>Deygers, Bart ; Van Gorp, Koen ; Demeester, Thomas</creatorcontrib><description>In Flanders, Belgium, university admission of undergraduate international L2 students requires a certificate of an accredited test of Dutch. The two main university entrance tests used for certification share highly comparable oral components and CEFR-based oral rating criteria. This article discusses to what extent ratings on the oral components of these tests can be compared. The data used are the ratings of the oral performances of the same 82 candidates on both oral test components, which were administered within the same week. The correlation on the overall scores is high, but lower on the oral test component. Further analyses, including linear regression and multifaceted Rasch analysis, indicate that the B2 level was interpreted differently in the two tests. The results show that using the same language proficiency scales as the basis for rating scale criteria may lead to superficial correspondences or a perceived equivalence but does not necessarily lead to greater comparability of shared criteria. The findings of this study are especially useful for contexts in which different tests use similar criteria that are based on the same descriptors, and comparability is only assumed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1543-4303</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1543-4311</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/15434303.2017.1421955</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Routledge</publisher><subject>College Admission ; College Entrance Examinations ; College students ; Comparative Analysis ; Correlation ; Dutch language ; Educational standards ; Evaluation Criteria ; Foreign Countries ; Foreign Students ; Indo European Languages ; Item Response Theory ; Language proficiency ; Language Tests ; Measures ; Oral Language ; Rasch model ; Rating Scales ; Regression (Statistics) ; Scores ; Second language tests ; Undergraduate Students</subject><ispartof>Language assessment quarterly, 2018-01, Vol.15 (1), p.44-58</ispartof><rights>2018 Taylor &amp; Francis 2018</rights><rights>2018 Taylor &amp; Francis</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,31246</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1171988$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Deygers, Bart</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Gorp, Koen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Demeester, Thomas</creatorcontrib><title>The B2 Level and the Dream of a Common Standard</title><title>Language assessment quarterly</title><description>In Flanders, Belgium, university admission of undergraduate international L2 students requires a certificate of an accredited test of Dutch. The two main university entrance tests used for certification share highly comparable oral components and CEFR-based oral rating criteria. This article discusses to what extent ratings on the oral components of these tests can be compared. The data used are the ratings of the oral performances of the same 82 candidates on both oral test components, which were administered within the same week. The correlation on the overall scores is high, but lower on the oral test component. Further analyses, including linear regression and multifaceted Rasch analysis, indicate that the B2 level was interpreted differently in the two tests. The results show that using the same language proficiency scales as the basis for rating scale criteria may lead to superficial correspondences or a perceived equivalence but does not necessarily lead to greater comparability of shared criteria. The findings of this study are especially useful for contexts in which different tests use similar criteria that are based on the same descriptors, and comparability is only assumed.</description><subject>College Admission</subject><subject>College Entrance Examinations</subject><subject>College students</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Dutch language</subject><subject>Educational standards</subject><subject>Evaluation Criteria</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Foreign Students</subject><subject>Indo European Languages</subject><subject>Item Response Theory</subject><subject>Language proficiency</subject><subject>Language Tests</subject><subject>Measures</subject><subject>Oral Language</subject><subject>Rasch model</subject><subject>Rating Scales</subject><subject>Regression (Statistics)</subject><subject>Scores</subject><subject>Second language tests</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><issn>1543-4303</issn><issn>1543-4311</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>7T9</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwCJUscU7rtZ3auQGl_KkSB8rZcmJHpEriYqdUfXscpfTIaVe73-xoB6EJkCkQSWaQcsYZYVNKQEyBU8jS9AyN-nnCGcD5qSfsEl2FsCGECpGREZqtvyx-oHhlf2yNdWtwFweP3uoGuxJrvHBN41r80cWd9uYaXZS6DvbmWMfo82m5Xrwkq_fn18X9Kim4YF1SCKopNfOcZ1IIIjVoIbnOeU4tBwNpySA3Wc4gY_Nc5hHlwsiIZykVxZyN0e1wd-vd986GTm3czrfRUlESn4ZIykilA1V4F4K3pdr6qtH-oICoPhv1l43qs1HHbKJuMuisr4qTZvkGICCT_d27YV-1pfON3jtfG9XpQ-186XVbVEGx_y1-ARZpcC0</recordid><startdate>20180102</startdate><enddate>20180102</enddate><creator>Deygers, Bart</creator><creator>Van Gorp, Koen</creator><creator>Demeester, Thomas</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Routledge, Taylor &amp; Francis Group</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180102</creationdate><title>The B2 Level and the Dream of a Common Standard</title><author>Deygers, Bart ; Van Gorp, Koen ; Demeester, Thomas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>College Admission</topic><topic>College Entrance Examinations</topic><topic>College students</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Dutch language</topic><topic>Educational standards</topic><topic>Evaluation Criteria</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Foreign Students</topic><topic>Indo European Languages</topic><topic>Item Response Theory</topic><topic>Language proficiency</topic><topic>Language Tests</topic><topic>Measures</topic><topic>Oral Language</topic><topic>Rasch model</topic><topic>Rating Scales</topic><topic>Regression (Statistics)</topic><topic>Scores</topic><topic>Second language tests</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Deygers, Bart</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Gorp, Koen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Demeester, Thomas</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Language assessment quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Deygers, Bart</au><au>Van Gorp, Koen</au><au>Demeester, Thomas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1171988</ericid><atitle>The B2 Level and the Dream of a Common Standard</atitle><jtitle>Language assessment quarterly</jtitle><date>2018-01-02</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>44</spage><epage>58</epage><pages>44-58</pages><issn>1543-4303</issn><eissn>1543-4311</eissn><abstract>In Flanders, Belgium, university admission of undergraduate international L2 students requires a certificate of an accredited test of Dutch. The two main university entrance tests used for certification share highly comparable oral components and CEFR-based oral rating criteria. This article discusses to what extent ratings on the oral components of these tests can be compared. The data used are the ratings of the oral performances of the same 82 candidates on both oral test components, which were administered within the same week. The correlation on the overall scores is high, but lower on the oral test component. Further analyses, including linear regression and multifaceted Rasch analysis, indicate that the B2 level was interpreted differently in the two tests. The results show that using the same language proficiency scales as the basis for rating scale criteria may lead to superficial correspondences or a perceived equivalence but does not necessarily lead to greater comparability of shared criteria. The findings of this study are especially useful for contexts in which different tests use similar criteria that are based on the same descriptors, and comparability is only assumed.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/15434303.2017.1421955</doi><tpages>15</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1543-4303
ispartof Language assessment quarterly, 2018-01, Vol.15 (1), p.44-58
issn 1543-4303
1543-4311
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2008014998
source ERIC; Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA); Taylor and Francis:Jisc Collections:Taylor and Francis Read and Publish Agreement 2024-2025:Social Sciences and Humanities Collection (Reading list)
subjects College Admission
College Entrance Examinations
College students
Comparative Analysis
Correlation
Dutch language
Educational standards
Evaluation Criteria
Foreign Countries
Foreign Students
Indo European Languages
Item Response Theory
Language proficiency
Language Tests
Measures
Oral Language
Rasch model
Rating Scales
Regression (Statistics)
Scores
Second language tests
Undergraduate Students
title The B2 Level and the Dream of a Common Standard
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T04%3A41%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20B2%20Level%20and%20the%20Dream%20of%20a%20Common%20Standard&rft.jtitle=Language%20assessment%20quarterly&rft.au=Deygers,%20Bart&rft.date=2018-01-02&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=44&rft.epage=58&rft.pages=44-58&rft.issn=1543-4303&rft.eissn=1543-4311&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421955&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2008014998%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c473t-c72a22d6b4987708a1a784ab4b2e41d15f31bd9b31936b8b2d647d8b499527c63%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2008014998&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1171988&rfr_iscdi=true