Abstract:

This study focuses on reflective practice journal entries and compares intermediate Spanish learners’ journals of their own oral performance through two different opportunities - an Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) and a Virtual Oral Interview Classroom/based Exam (VOICES) - within the framework of a Spanish for the Professions course. Students’ journals reveal that both types of assessment have their advantages in the learning process, which results in more autonomous and more efficient learners (Ziegler, 2014). Moreover, data from the two focus groups reveals information about sufficiency, relevance, beneficence, and usefulness about the Spanish speaking activities used in the Spanish for the Professions course. This study presents an assessment use argument following Bachman and Damböck (2017) that may be used to design and teach language courses using micro-formative and macro-summative oral assessments. Using an assessment use argument, claims were made about the use of VOICES and OPI. Participants in this study were 13 undergraduate students at a large public university in the Midwest of the United States and one instructor. They were enrolled in an intermediate Spanish conversation course designed for professionals. Language performance data for oral assessments from face-to-face and online formats were evaluated comparing instances of language use. The data showed that the two types of oral assessments engaged learners in different types of learning opportunities.

Keywords:

assessment use argument, oral assessment, interpretive argument, reflective practice.