Un breve recorrido histórico

Bachman & Palmer say that “the definition of the construct is based on a frame of reference such as a course syllabus(sic), a needs analysis, or current research and/or theory of language use” (Bachman & Palmer 2010, p. 211). This is the case in Norway where the Regulations to the Act of Education says that it is the subject curriculum that is the construct for the oral examination. Because of this it is necessary to look closer at what the curriculum says about oral proficiency. However, as you will see when looking at the English-subject curriculum, and as I will show below, it is not only the competence aims concerning oral proficiency that are relevant for the oral examination. There are also competence aims concerning subject knowledge that are relevant for the English oral examination. In fact, the competence aims are so diverse, that I argue that there can actually be defined two constructs to be tested in the examination (cf. Bachman & Palmer 2010, pp. 239-240). I will come back to this below when I present the competence aims that constitute the construct(s).

3.2.1 The first construct: The competence aims for oral proficiency

The first construct that can be defined concerns the oral proficiency skills. Because the

curriculum defines oral skills as “being able to both listen and speak” (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2006/2010), competence aims concerning both speaking and listening has to be included when we look at oral skills. According to Simensen (2010) the English subject curriculum in Norway is build on the recommendations in the CEFR, and because of this you find many of the points about communicative competence from the CEFR in the competence aims of the English subject curriculum.

21 The competence aims that are relevant to define oral proficiency are found in the main area Communication in the English subject curriculum. The competence aims are:

The student shall be able to

 understand and use a wide general vocabulary and an academic vocabulary related to his/her own education programme

 understand oral and written presentations about general and specialised themes related to his/her own education programme

 express him/herself in writing and orally in a varied, differentiated and precise manner, with good progression and coherence

 select and use appropriate reading and listening strategies to locate information in oral and written texts

 select and use appropriate writing and speaking strategies that are adapted to a purpose, situation and genre

 take the initiative to begin, end and keep a conversation going

(Utdanningsdirektoratet 2006/2010)

As we can see the competence aims are to a large extent inspired by the components from the CEFR that was presented above. They are detailed at the same time as they are open for a interpretation. For example it will be influenced by subjective opinion what a wide

vocabulary is. It can also be discussed what a varied, differentiated and precise manner is. Even if the competence aims are detailed, they need to be interpreted for it to be possible to assess according to them. This can be done by making rating scales, which I will come back to later in the chapter.

3.2.2 The second construct: Competence aims for content

competence

According to the Regulations to the Act of Education it is the curriculum that is to be tested in the examination (Forskrift til Opplæringslova § 3-3, §3-17, § 3-25). Furthermore, the

Regulations also say that as many of the competence aims as possible should be tested in the examination (Forskrift til Opplæringslove § 3-30). This means that it is not only the

communicative competence aims that are to be tested in the oral examination. In addition the competence aims concerning content competence have to be tested. This is the reason why I

22

argue that there can be defined two constructs. By content competence I mean competence that reflect knowledge about various theoretical topics, for example knowledge about

literature, knowledge about how people live in different speaking countries, knowledge about the history of English speaking countries, knowledge about culture and society, etc.

The competence aims I feel define the second construct, can be found in the main areas Culture, society and literature and Language learning. The competence aims concerning content competence are:

The student shall be able to

 discuss social and cultural conditions and values from a number of English-speaking countries

 present and discuss international news topics and current events  give an account of the use of English as a universal world language

 discuss and elaborate on English texts from a selection of different genres, poems, short stories, novels, films and theatre plays from different epochs and parts of the world

 discuss literature by and about indigenous peoples in the English-speaking world  describe and evaluate the effects of different verbal forms of expression

 assess and comment on his/her progress in learning English

(Utdanningsdirektoratet 2006/2010)

As we see these competence aims represent something completely different than those a presented in the previous section. However, they need to be a part of the assessment of the oral examination because the Regulations to the Act of Education say so. The remaining competence aims need not to be included because they are not directly relevant. They may be indirectly relevant, but the Directorate of Education points out that it is the students'

performance at the examination that should be assessed (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2010).

3.2.3 Summing up

In the previous sections I have taken a look at what oral proficiency is and what should be assessed in an oral examination. I started by looking at the what the CEFR defines as

23 is build on the CEFR. According to the Regulations to the Act of Education it is the subject curriculum that decides what should be tested in the oral examination and I have looked at the competence aims that are relevant for the oral examination. These show that there are many different aspects that have to be included. In fact, I have argued, that because of the large differences, one can say that there can be defined two constructs that are to be assessed in the oral examination (cf. Bachman and Palmer 2010). In the following sections I will look at operationalizing of speaking tests, first I will look at speaking test tasks and how to develop them, and further I will look at rating scales and how they can be made.