Studies in Language Assessment Best Paper Award 2022-2023
Formerly known as PLTA best paper award.
Winner
Barkaoui, K. & Woodworth, J. (2023) An exploratory study of the construct measured by automated writing scores across task types and test occasions. Studies in Language Assessment 12(1), 26-63. https://doi.org/10.58379/QCFS2805
Citation:
This paper provides a thorough and well-executed exploration of the construct measured by automated writing scores and human rating across integrated and independent task types. The authors undertake a very detailed analysis of the existing literature to illustrate a lack of focus on whether and how the relationship between automated and human scores varies across tasks and test occasions. This analysis of 30 studies provides an excellent resource for future research. Given the increasing uptake of automated scoring in high-stakes standardised writing tests, the paper offers both a timely and important contribution to the field. In particular, the study provides valuable insights into significant differences in the associations between automated and human scores for some writing features across task types.
Other finalists:
Glasson, N. (2022) Is the devil you know better? Testwiseness and eliciting evidence of interactional competence in familiar versus unfamiliar triadic speaking tasks. Studies in Language Assessment 11(2), 58-97 https://doi.org/10.58379/TTFE6660
Hudson, C., Angelo, D. & Creagh, S. (2023) Instantiating justice, fairness and inclusiveness in English as an Additional Language/Dialect assessment frameworks: Unpacking the evidence base for the Bandscales State Schools (Queensland). Studies in Language Assessment 12(2), 235-271. https://doi.org/10.58379/RXAZ8430
Jin, Y. (2023) Decision making in large-scale language testing: Intersections of policy, practice and research. Studies in Language Assessment 12(1), 64-91 https://doi.org/10.58379/HKKX5020
Selection Committee:
Associate Professor Karen Ashton (Chair)
Dr Lyn May
Associate Professor Xun Yan
Criteria for Selection
Formerly known as PLTA best paper award.
Winner
Barkaoui, K. & Woodworth, J. (2023) An exploratory study of the construct measured by automated writing scores across task types and test occasions. Studies in Language Assessment 12(1), 26-63. https://doi.org/10.58379/QCFS2805
Citation:
This paper provides a thorough and well-executed exploration of the construct measured by automated writing scores and human rating across integrated and independent task types. The authors undertake a very detailed analysis of the existing literature to illustrate a lack of focus on whether and how the relationship between automated and human scores varies across tasks and test occasions. This analysis of 30 studies provides an excellent resource for future research. Given the increasing uptake of automated scoring in high-stakes standardised writing tests, the paper offers both a timely and important contribution to the field. In particular, the study provides valuable insights into significant differences in the associations between automated and human scores for some writing features across task types.
Other finalists:
Glasson, N. (2022) Is the devil you know better? Testwiseness and eliciting evidence of interactional competence in familiar versus unfamiliar triadic speaking tasks. Studies in Language Assessment 11(2), 58-97 https://doi.org/10.58379/TTFE6660
Hudson, C., Angelo, D. & Creagh, S. (2023) Instantiating justice, fairness and inclusiveness in English as an Additional Language/Dialect assessment frameworks: Unpacking the evidence base for the Bandscales State Schools (Queensland). Studies in Language Assessment 12(2), 235-271. https://doi.org/10.58379/RXAZ8430
Jin, Y. (2023) Decision making in large-scale language testing: Intersections of policy, practice and research. Studies in Language Assessment 12(1), 64-91 https://doi.org/10.58379/HKKX5020
Selection Committee:
Associate Professor Karen Ashton (Chair)
Dr Lyn May
Associate Professor Xun Yan
Criteria for Selection
- The contribution of the work to the field of language testing and assessment, or to the interface between language testing and other areas of enquiry (and in particular the originality of the contribution).
- The persuasiveness of the argument (whether based on the interpretation of empirical data, theoretical rationales, or both).
- The thoroughness of the literature review.
- The clarity of presentation (written expression; the use of figures and tables, where appropriate).
- In the case of empirical studies, the quality of the procedures for data-gathering and analysis.