【Abstract】This essay intends to investigate the factors that affect test takers performance in communicative oral tests based on a framework proposed by Bachman. It introduces the general factors suggested by Bachman， followed by the explanation of the communicative oral tests and the factors that have significant influence on the test scores. This investigation demonstrates that， besides communicative language ability， there are various factors affecting test takers performance， ranging from test method facets， personal attributes to random factors.

【Key words】language testing； communicative oral tests； factors

【作者簡介】徐淑穎（1983-），女，浙江人，西南民族大學(xué)預(yù)科教育學(xué)院，碩士，講師，研究方向：應(yīng)用語言學(xué)。

Introduction

The purpose of language testing is to provide an accurate measure of learners language abilities. And it has been long observed that， apart form the language ability the tests intend to measure， there are many other factors that may have effect on test results. Such factors may come from a wide variety of sources， such as test method facets， personal attributes of test takers and even other random factors. Therefore， test constructors must try to understand these affecting factors and minimize the impact of intervening factors.

1. Bachmans model of factors that affect language test scores

In his book Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing， Bachman hold the idea that candidates performance on language tests is affected by factors other than their communicative language ability. And he put these factors into three general categories. The first category is test method facets， and the second category includes attributes of the test taker that are not considered part of the language ability. The last category refers to random factors that are largely unpredictable and temporary. （Bachman， 1990）

The concept of communicative language ability was first proposed in the 1970s. What is most significant of the CLA concept is its recognition of the importance of the social cultural factors in the speech situation - the context in which language use takes place and the interaction between that context and the discourse itself.

According to Bachman， test method facets can be further divided into five subcategories， including test environment， test rubrics， the nature of the input， the nature of the expected response， and the relationship between input and response.

The personal attributes that have effect on test takers scores include individual characteristics such as cognitive style and knowledge of particular content areas of the test， as well as group characteristics such as gender， race and ethnic background. These attributes are systematic factors that are believed regularly affect test takers performance on tests.

Random factors， which are unpredictable and largely temporary， may come from a variety of sources. Examples of random factors include the mental alertness and emotional state of the test taker， the changes in the test environment， the idiosyncratic differences in the way different test administrators carry out their responsibilities； the incompleteness of language sample and imprecision of the scales used to rate a test. Since they are unpredictable and unsystematic， random factors can seldom be manipulated.

2. The adoption of Bachmans model in communicative oral language tests

According to Bachmans CLA models， communicative oral tests emphasis on the social function， appropriate use and effectiveness of the language. Communicative oral tests are usually authentic， functional， interactive， contextualized and holistic.

Typical items of communicative oral tests are role play， discussion and interview. In role-play activities， test takers are usually assigned fictitious roles and then required to improvise in language and behavior. The role-plays used may vary from simple role-plays involving only two candidates to more complex ones involving more candidates and even the examiners. Group discussion refers to the activity in which the members of the group involved are given a particular situation or topic and instructed to make various communications. This type of activity usually involves two to four candidates. An interview， on the other hand， is a series of face-to-face interaction between the examiner and the candidate. Interviews can take the forms of question asking and answering， role-play， presentation， discussion and so on.

According to WEN Qiu-fang， communicative oral test includes two basic test formats， namely the two-way interaction model and the multiple-way interaction model. The two-way interaction model involves both the interaction between the examiner and the test taker， and the interaction between two test takers. The multiple-way interaction model involves interactions among more than two test takers. （Wen， 1999）

The scoring of communicative oral tests usually bases on detailed making scheme， with clear but usually brief description of the criteria of different grades. Generally speaking， the test takers will be judged on accuracy， fluency， comprehensibility of their language and the communicative strategies they employed in the interaction.

3. Factors that affect test takers performance on communicative oral tests

In late 1990s， Weir made a careful study of the advantages and disadvantages of the most widely used formats of oral tests. Such formats include oral presentation， free interview， controlled interview， description of picture sequence， interaction and role-play and so on， and most of them are still widely used all over the world as the assessment of oral language ability.

Weir found that the use of tape recorder might be stressful to some test taker. In todays educational environment， we may make a conjecture that the use of computers is stressful to some test takers. In the format of description of a picture sequence， the quality of the picture may have affected the performance. And in interaction tasks， there are even more problems. If one of the test takers dominates the interaction， other test takers may have fewer opportunities to demonstrate communicative potential. If there is a large difference in proficiency between the test takers， the communication may not go as smoothly as expected， and the examiners judgments will also be influenced. If one of the test takers is more interested in the topic or the task， the interaction may become one-sided.

Heaton expressed a similar idea by saying that “the chief danger in conduction interviews with pairs of students is that resulting from personality conflicts or the dominance of one of the members of the pair. It is therefore very important for the teacher or examiner to ensure that the two students forming a pair have similar or sympathetic personalities and have similar levels of language ability.” （Heaton， qtd. in GUO， 2004）

Besides the framework of a wide range of factors， Bachman also pointed out another important factor in terms of oral test， “In addition， research indicates that the number of individuals involved in interactive tests， such as an oral interview， can affect test takers perceptions of the test， and thus， presumably their performance.”（Bachman， 1990）

4. Conclusion

This essay investigates the factors that affect test takers performance on communicative oral language tests based on Bachmans framework. Such factors range from test method facets to random factors， and they may undermine the reliability and validity of the tests. Therefore， test constructors and test administrators should take these important factors in to consideration and try their best to minimize the negative effect of these factors on the test results.

This essay has made it obvious that there is a wide range of factors that may affect test takers performance in communicative oral tests. However， the extent to which they affect the performance remains an unsolved problem. Given more time and sources， the author would love to make further investigation in this aspect.

References：

[1]Bachman，L.F.Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing [M].Oxford：Oxford University Press，1990.

[2]文秋芳.英語口語測試及教學(xué)[M].上海：上海外語教育出版社， 1999.

[3]Weir，C.Communicative Language Testing[M]. Hemel Hempstead： Prentice Hall，1990.

[4]GUO Qiu-xiu.Analysis of Factors Affecting Performance in CET-SET[D].Zhejiang University，2004.