Conference Agenda

It is well-established that tests hold great power (Shohamy, 2004, 2007) and often become de-facto policies reinforcing status quo by (de)prioritizing individuals’ or groups’ language repertoires (Cushing, 2021). Tests often act as a “filtering bottleneck” limiting access to future opportunities (Winke, 2021). In the case of Mandarin Chinese as an additional and heritage language, the opportunity-restricting nature of language tests is particularly salient as it relates to writing ability. The majority tests used for high-stakes (e.g., employment), mid-stakes (e.g., course placement and credit), and low-stakes (e.g., classroom assessment) require that test takers write one or more compositions, usually by hand rather than by computer. Critically, recent research has shown that Chinese tests using handwriting and typing elicit vastly different “writing” scores from the same individual test takers; test takers may with typed responses consistently out-score their own hand-written responses. However, no study to date has examined the extent to which intermediate level learners (the most common level in additional language programs, Winke et al., 2020) or heritage learners receive different score profiles when typing and handwriting.

The present study collected two writing assessment samples from 60 intermediate- and low-advanced level university learners of L2 Chinese (120 total samples). All writing samples were anonymized and rated by two certified writing proficiency test raters. Linear mixed effects models revealed that regardless of modality or prompt order, the majority of test takers wrote significantly more and received (usually much) higher scores on typed responses. Based on these findings, I argue that language assessments used for educational decisions at any level of stakes (low-high) must be designed to elicit language abilities from an asset-oriented perspective, and that failure to do so will continue to marginalize and exclude language learners from academic and professional opportunities.

As China's international influence grows and the implementation of the "Double First-Class" initiative takes place, the degree of openness in Chinese higher education continues to increase. In this process, the Chinese Proficiency Exam(Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi, or HSK), organized and implemented by the Ministry of Education of China as a policy-driven assessment, is gradually becoming a high-stakes test significantly impacting the admission, scholarships, and graduation of foreign students. In the discipline of language policy and planning, language testing is commonly regarded as a product of social-political systems (Spolsky, 1995), and is seen as a language policy or a kind of mechanisms (Shohamy, 2007), whose social impact has been greatly concerned. Presently, studies largely focus on global English high-stakes tests like IELTS and TOEFL, while attention toward non-English language tests remains relatively limited.

This study, influenced by the "discourse turn" within language policy research (Barakos & Unger, 2016), employs a critical discourse approach for policy-driven tests proposed by Shin (2023), based on Bachman and Palmer's (2010) Assessment Use Argument (AUA) framework and Fairclough's (1992, 2001) critical discourse analysis framework, to analyze the social impact of the Chinese Proficiency Exam. By encompassing discourse practices of various stakeholders at different scales, this research aims to provide a more authentic and comprehensive reflection of the social significance and value of the new Chinese Proficiency Exam. It can also enrich the study of non-English high-stakes tests within the language policy perspective, and help to develop discourse approach as a research paradigm in the field of language policy and planning.

Many US university students stop studying world languages after finishing their institutional requirement (Looney & Lusin, 2019), leading some universities to remove this requirement or dissolve language departments entirely (Anderson, 2023; Jaschik, 2018). Although studies have observed institutional policies shaping students’ decisions to (dis)continue world language study (Diao & Liu, 2021; Thompson, 2017), language policy as a framework has been underutilized in world language education research (Hult, 2018). In response, this study employed Bonacina-Pugh’s (2012) lens of language policy as text, discourse, and practice to examine one US university’s language requirement in relation to students’ perspectives toward their learning experiences and their language practices in class. Data included university-level and department-level policy texts, semi-structured interviews with ten students, and audio recordings of classroom discourse from two sections of a semester-long (required) Spanish course. Analysis focused on discursive framings of language, the language learning process, students as language learners, and the curricular language requirement.

Analysis of policy documents reflected competing discourses (e.g., language as object of study or means for communication; language as monoglossic or part of a plurilingual repertoire) and suggested that while framed as central to liberal arts education, language study is deprioritized within the university’s larger curriculum. Analysis of student interviews indicated perceptions toward required language study that aligned with competing discourses reflected in policy texts; although students considered benefits of language learning, they viewed required language study as a formality and unlikely to lead to actual language development. Analysis of classroom discourse reflected similar competing discourses at play and revealed contradictions between students’ practiced language policies through their use of language to discuss life experiences, metacommentary about language, and employment of plurilingual repertoires. From these findings, implications are drawn for language policy articulation and curricular framing in the hope of supporting student investment in world language study.

This presentation aims at reporting the development of policies and practices designed to support adult migrants’ linguistic integration in Italy (Machetti et al., 2018). The presentation builds on a report on language assessment practices at the local level carried out within the framework of current legislation with the purpose of focusing on the use of language requirements for the issuance of long stay permits for non-EU citizens (Masillo, 2019). This research is part of a broader line of study that explores the use of language tests as a power tool and how they can act as barrier to access a host country (Shohamy 2001, 2006; McNamara, Roever 2006).

The presentation discusses the results of an impact study conducted to monitor local procedures for L2 Italian teaching and assessment (https://www.associazionecliq.it/progetto-fami-1603-2017-2021/). A repertoire of local good practices was collected at national level to stimulate and support the constant commitment of teachers indirectly involved in language policies. Through both qualitative and quantitative research methodology, the presentation addresses how the promotion of a research project involving the systematic and structured teacher training in the LAL field led to an improvement in terms of test development and to a more general (positive) impact on L2 Italian learning and teaching processes.

Machetti S., Barni M. & Bagna C. 2018. Language policies for migrants in Italy: The tension between democracy, decision-making, and linguistic diversity. In M. Gazzola, T. Templin, & BA. Wickström (Eds.), Language policy and linguistic justice. Springer.

Masillo P. 2019. La valutazione linguistica in contesto migratorio: il test A2. Pacini Editore.

McNamara T., Roever C., 2006, Language Testing: the social dimension, Malden, MA, Blackwell.

Shohamy E., 2001, The power of tests. A critical perspective on the use of language tests, Harlow, Pearson.

Shohamy E., 2006, Language policy: Hidden agendas and new approaches, New York, Routledge.