Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Revisiting the Spanish elicited imitation task: A tool for assessing advanced language learners?

  • Megan Solon(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Hae In Park
    ,
  • Carly Henderson
    ,
  • Marzieh Dehghan-Chaleshtori
*Corresponding author for this work
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Abstract

Elicited imitation tasks (EITs) have been shown to be a valid, reliable, and practical method for establishing second-language (L2) oral proficiency across a variety of languages. Nevertheless, research that has validated existing EITs has most often explored a narrow range of learner proficiencies or has examined how well the EIT distinguishes between low- and high-level learners. Bowden's (2016) validation study of the Spanish EIT was the first to expand the range of learner proficiencies by including low, advanced, and very advanced L2 learners; her results suggested that, in its current state, the EIT may not be equipped to distinguish finer-grained levels of proficiency, especially at more advanced levels. The present study revisits the Spanish EIT to examine (a) its ability to distinguish between higher level learners and (b) whether including additional, more challenging EIT items allows for finer-grained distinctions at higher levels. Results suggest that the addition of longer, more challenging EIT items can improve the discriminability of the test among more advanced L2 learners.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 1027-1053 (27 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Studies in Second Language Acquisition (Volume 41, Issue 5)

Publication milestones

  • Accepted/In press - 01/01/2019
  • Published - 12/01/2019

Publication status

Published - 12/01/2019

ISSN

0272-2631

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 85067944817

Publication metrics

Metrics

SciVal
citations
3
SciVal
FWCI
1.60
SciVal
Author count
4
SciVal
Paper percentile
66
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.25
Fractional count
3
Fractional count
0.75
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Scopus
citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
31
Citation count
28