Assessing Interactional Competence: ICE versus a Human Partner

Most second language assessment researchers agree that interactional competence (IC) is an important part of the construct of oral communication. However, measurement of IC has proven challenging because at least one interlocutor is considered necessary to create an appropriate social context for test takers to demonstrate their IC. Including interlocutors in the assessment process can be impractical and may make judging test takers' IC difficult because their performances may be impacted by the interlocutors. One potential approach to assessing oral communication that might diminish these challenges is to use a Spoken Dialogue System (SDS) as a test taker's partner. To explore the potential of an SDS for assessing the IC, the use of an SDS and a human peer partner were compared to determine which is more appropriate for eliciting discourse for this purpose. Forty test takers completed a video-taped paired discussion task with both a human partner and Interactional Competence Elicitor (ICE), an SDS created by the researchers. Four trained raters evaluated the video-recorded performances, and results indicated that in the SDS condition raters: believed more features of IC were ratable, assigned lower scores for most IC features, and had more positive perceptions of the rating process.

Automated summary

Most second language assessment researchers agree that interactional competence (IC) is crucial in oral communication assessment. However, assessing IC is challenging due to the need for an interlocutor. Using a Spoken Dialogue System (SDS) as a test taker's partner could mitigate these challenges. A study comparing an SDS with a human peer partner found that the SDS condition resulted in more ratable IC features, lower scores for most IC features, and more positive perceptions of the rating process.