3.2.1 Assessment in CA literature
In CA literature, the term assessmentdoes not relate to a process through which
information is collected to make diagnoses of the type that occur in SLT practice; instead, it relates to a claim to knowledge about the value or nature of something. Assessments are a common feature of social activities and can be done on any aspect of the phenomenal world – people, places, objects, animals, events, actions, thoughts, feelings, beliefs, etc. Goodwin & Goodwin (1987) argue that the term assessment covers a range of phenomena that need to be addressed at analytically different levels, including the ‘assessable’ entity, an assessment ‘segment’ (i.e. a structural unit that occurs within the flow of talk), and a particular type of speech act being performed by the person producing the assessment. In her classic article on agreeing and disagreeing with assessments, Pomerantz (1984) identified some important features of assessments and noted that “assessments are
produced as products of participation; with an assessment, a speaker claims knowledge of that which he or she is assessing”(1984:54).Producing an assessment gives the interaction partner a sense of the speaker’s experience of the activity or phenomenon.
An important feature of assessments is that they normally invite a second assessment from the hearer (Pomerantz, 1984). It is through the production of second assessments, which respond in some way to a first assessment, that participants routinely calibrate their shared understanding of the world. An example of this calibration of understanding can be seen in excerpt 3.1.
Excerpt 3.1: pretty bare
112 T oh:okay.right. and you’re living up at the Meridian?
113 C Meridian hospital.
114 T how’s that going?
116 T pretty bare
117 C what does it mean? it’s a good word.
118 T like this room. Not much.
119 C very basic?
120 T very basic.
When the SLT asks the client about the place where he is staying, the client responds with a muted positive evaluation (line 115: “It’s not bad- (.) it’s not bad
actually.”). The client self-repairs, repeating the first evaluation and finishing the repeat with the ‘stance adverbial’ actually, which has been shown to “help to establish a sense of
solidarity” (Biber, 2009:17). The SLT produces a second assessment that focuses on possible negative aspects of the accommodation (line 116: “pretty bare”). It is through this assessment sequence, and the following clarification of word meaning (lines 117-120), that we see the SLT and the client engage in what Goodwin & Goodwin (1992) found participants in interaction are doing, i.e. “calibrate their separate evaluations of events in their phenomenal world and … demonstrate how their minds are in tune with each other” (1992:149), coming to a shared understanding of the meaning of the word bare.
Antaki (2000, 2002) adds to our understanding of the action of various types of
assessments by revealing that some assessments are actually used to mark control of an interactional sequence, rather than to express an opinion about a feature of the phenomenal world. He found that high-grade assessments, such as brilliant or lovely, are used as
“markers of interactionally relevant action, marking the control or ownership of the interactional sequence” (Antaki, 2002:22).
CA research has provided researchers interested in assessment with a powerful lens through which to explore assessment phenomena in interaction. This research shows that assessments are an important vehicle through which participants calibrate their
understanding of the world, but that they may also be used as a mechanism of control.
3.2.2 Assessment in SLT literature
In SLT literature and practice, the term assessment is used to define the proces, often complex, of determining whether or not someone has a speech or language impairment. This process generally involves the collection of data, through observation, administration of tests, discussion, collection of artefacts and naturally occurring interaction data (ASHA, 2004). The data is then coded or otherwise analysed to make a judgement about whether or
not a particular set of behaviours, on the part of the client, relates to a speech or language impairment.
In the Competency-Based Occupational Standards (CBOS) for entry level graduates in Australia (SPA, 2011), assessment is the first of seven areas of competency that graduates need to be able to undertake and complete independently before they can graduate. As the excerpt from the CBOS document in Figure 3.1 shows, the term assessment involves actions such as investigate, identify, administer and undertake.
Unit 1- Assessment
In assessment, the speech pathologist establishes the communication and/or swallowing condition and issues of the client.
Element 1.1: Establishes and documents the presenting communication and/or swallowing condition and issues; identifies the significant other people in the client’s life and collates information on the client.
Element 1.2: Identifies the communication and/or swallowing conditions requiring investigation and the most suitable manner in which to do this.
Element 1.3: Administers speech pathology assessment relevant to the communication and/or swallowing information required.
Element 1.4: Undertakes assessment within the ethical guidelines of the profession and all relevant legislation and legal constraints, including medico-legal
responsibilities.
Figure 3.1
Elements of Unit 1 – Assessment (SPA, 2011:3)
These assessment processes are fundamental to the professional activity of speech pathologists; all other professional activities are based on the identification of whether a person presents with a communication or swallowing disorder or not. In keeping with the ubiquity and importance of assessment in SLT professional activity, the term assessment
and the corresponding verb assess are used frequently in discussion with clients and significant others, as well as in the literature. The term can cover both the broader process of data gathering and the actual tests that may be administered as part of the overall process. Inevitably, it implies something that the SLT does ‘to’ the client – rather than a process of mutual discovery.
3.2.3 Summarising assessment
The term assessment in the SLT literature is used very differently from the way it occurs in the CA literature. While the SLT use of the term assessment is likely to involve some level of evaluation of client actions or linguistic behaviour, the term actually covers a more longitudinal process of collecting, collating, sifting, sorting and ascribing significance to data from various sources, not one single social action. In contrast, the term assessment in the CA literature refers to a mechanism whereby participants establish a shared
understanding of both the world around them and the action(s) they are involved in. This calibration of perspectives relies heavily on the sequential organisation of talk-in-
interaction, whereby ‘first’ assessments invite listeners to co-ordinate their understanding through the provision of a sequentially relevant ‘second’ assessment (Pomerantz, 1984), while isolated high grade assessments (Antaki, 2000) seem to function more to mark control of the interactional sequence itself.
The CA research on ‘assessments’ described above primarily relates to the exploration of judgements made in mundane, or everyday, talk-in-interaction. There are some differences in the way judgments are produced in institutional settings, commensurate with the
different roles and knowledge held by various parties in institutional contexts and the overall purpose or ‘goal’ of the interaction. One of the features of institutional interactions is that the institutional persona has the right to evaluate aspects of a client’s behaviour (Drew & Heritage, 1992; Heritage, 1998).