How to Test Speaking Skills in Japan

49 Chapter 5: Identify & define your evaluation criteria actions and the ability to give extended answers to a question, you could devise a rubric to fit those needs For example:

Level 1 : Long gaps of silence, unable to answer questions. Level 2 : Noticeable gaps of silence, very short answers.

Level 3 : Hesitated a bit, but could answer questions in a minimalist way. Level 4 : Answered all the questions promptly and added extra details. Level 5 : Provided long answers quickly, without hesitation. This rubric also exemplifies the limitations inherent in the holistic assessment approach—in reality, most of your students will likely get similar scores, depending on the group, of course Since classes do not frequently meet in Japan, students may remain stuck at the same level throughout the length of the class Both outcomes could affect student morale, so keep these limitations in mind Analytic approach: Choose your constructs wisely Designing an analytic scoring rubric can be quite similar to devising a holistic one, but there is one added step—you need to first decide which aspects of speaking ability to evaluate As I mentioned, there are lots of possible choices here As always, allow your course objec tives to guide you Remember that the choices you make will draw student attention to whatever you think is most important for them to improve upon Once your constructs are chosen, your job then is to create rating scales for each one While this may seem daunting, remember that if you’re clear on what you want your students to accomplish, the process becomes quite easy to manage In terms of possible marking categories, Underhill (1987) makes a handy distinction between traditional ones based on the view that accurate language is most important, and modern con-