Abstract
Diagnostic language assessment has received increased research interest in recent years, with particular attention on methods through which diagnostic information can be gleaned from standardized proficiency tests. However, diagnostic procedures in the broader sense have been inadequately theorized to date, with the result that there is still little agreement on precisely what diagnosis in second and foreign language learning actually entails. In order to address this problem, this article investigated how diagnosis is theorized and carried out in a diverse range of professions with a view to finding commonalities that can be applied to the context of language assessment. Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted with professionals from the fields of car mechanics, IT systems support, medicine, psychology and education. Data were then coded, yielding five macro-categories that fit the entire data set: (i) definitions of diagnosis, (ii) means of diagnosis, (iii) key players, (iv) diagnostic procedures, (v) treatment/follow-up. Based on findings within these categories, a set of five tentative principles of diagnostic language assessment is drawn-up, as well as a list of implications for future research.
Highlights
Despite a recent wave of interest in diagnosis in language testing and assessment (Alderson 2005, 2007; Alderson and Huhta 2005; Huhta 2008; Lee and Sawaki 2009) there are very few truly diagnostic second and foreign language (SFL) tests
We would argue that SFL diagnosis, relating as it does to the complex and dynamic systems involved in language acquisition, would be more analogous to the context of dealing with the workings of the human body or mind
While there is still work to be done in articulating a comprehensive theory of diagnosis in SFL assessment, this article has drawn on expertise outside the field to map out some of the broad aspects of what such a theory might entail: a clear definition of diagnosis, a clear understanding of the means of diagnosis and the participants involved, a set of procedures for conducting diagnoses and a closer focus on the interface between a decision and the intervention to follow
Summary
Despite a recent wave of interest in diagnosis in language testing and assessment (Alderson 2005, 2007; Alderson and Huhta 2005; Huhta 2008; Lee and Sawaki 2009) there are very few truly diagnostic second and foreign language (SFL) tests. There is only a small number of tests [e.g. DIALANG (Alderson 2005; Alderson and Huhta 2005); DELNA Auckland.ac.nz/uoa); DELTA (Urmston et al 2013)] which are purposively designed for diagnostic purposes; that is, where the construct, test items and. HARDING 237 testing procedures are informed a priori by a working theory of SFL diagnosis. May represent an impoverished view of what diagnostic assessment is capable of
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
