Skip Navigation


ELT Journal Advance Access originally published online on June 4, 2007
ELT Journal 2008 62(3):266-275; doi:10.1093/elt/ccm044
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
62/3/266    most recent
ccm044v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nakatsuhara, F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.

Inter-interviewer variation in oral interview tests

Fumiyo Nakatsuhara

Fumiyo Nakatsuhara is a PhD student in Language Testing at the University of Essex. Her research interests include the nature of co-constructed interaction in various speaking test formats, such as interview, paired, and group formats. Her PhD research focuses on conversational style in group oral tests, considering the impact of candidate characteristics, group size, and task types

Email: fnakat{at}essex.ac.uk

Received for publication 1 February 2007.
   Abstract

Over the last two decades, research has suggested that candidates' test performances and scores are collaboratively achieved through interviewing/scoring processes and there could be unfair situations caused by the inter-interviewer variation. To investigate a precise picture of the impact of inter-interviewer variation, this research examines the variability of interviewer behaviour, its influence on a candidate's performance and raters' consequent perceptions of the candidate's ability on analytical rating scales (for example, pronunciation, grammar, fluency). The data are collected from two interview sessions involving the same candidate with two different interviewers, and the video-taped interviews are rated by 22 raters on five marking categories. The results show that a significantly different score was awarded to ‘pronunciation’ and ‘fluency’ in the two interviews. The reasons for the differences are discussed based on conversation analysis findings. This paper concludes with suggestions as to how the potential unfairness caused by interviewer variability could be solved.


Final revised version received February 2007


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.