Abstract
In second language (L2) learning research, learners’ proficiency levels and progress are often investigated. Sometimes high-stakes tests, which are part of the school curriculum, are used for this purpose, but more often tests designed for the purpose of the specific research study are utilized. How do we know that tests of the latter kind actually show what learners know and can do, when they do not have any impact on school grades? In other words, how can we be sure that our informants do as well in low-stakes tests specifically designed for research purposes as they would in high-stakes tests that result in final grades, and thus have an impact on the individual’s future? The answer is, of course, that we can never know for sure. One way of finding out, though, is to compare results from high- and low-stakes tests. 
 
 In this study, we examine whether students display similar levels of performance when writing in high- and low-stakes contexts, with regard to the use of English academic vocabulary and some other linguistic features, more precisely text length, word length and variation of vocabulary. Thereby, we indirectly explore whether students have put a similar amount of effort into high- and low-stakes writing assignments. We investigate this by analyzing and comparing texts written under high- and low-stakes conditions. The purpose of the study is, firstly, to validate results obtained in the low-stakes writing assignments used in the large-scale longitudinal research project Content and Language Integration in Swedish Schools, CLISS, focusing in particular on results regarding productive academic vocabulary and the linguistic features mentioned above. Secondly, we hope that this study will shed new light on validity in relation to writing assignments in high- and low-stakes contexts in a more general sense, for instance with regard to the role of effort and motivation.
Highlights
In second language (L2) learning research, learners’ proficiency levels and progress are often investigated
We examine whether students display similar levels of performance when writing in high- and low-stakes contexts, with regard to the use of English academic vocabulary and some other linguistic features, more precisely text length, word length and variation of vocabulary
The main aim of CLIL is to enhance language learning, compared to what is possible in the limited time available for regular language arts classes, as subject content presented in the target language may offer authentic and linguistically challenging input and frequent opportunities to use the language (Cenoz, Genesee, & Gorter, 2014; Dalton-Puffer, 2011)
Summary
Total N 43 39 49 55 35 221 table 1. Some other text features – text length, average word length and variation of vocabulary – are compared, as these features may indicate whether students’ efforts seem to have been at a similar level when writing the low-stakes assignments as when writing the high-stakes national test. Since it was beyond the scope of the CLISS project to distribute surveys of motivation in direct connection to the writing assignments, there are no such data available. We have analysed the same type of linguistic features in texts written in both the high- and lowstakes contexts to establish if they result in similar outcomes with regard to the features in focus
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
