About the impossibility of assessing speaking with focus both on form and communicative output

“Assessing speaking is not impossible, but difficult (…): teachers often focus narrowly on the development of grammatically accurate speech which may conflict with a learner’s desire to communicate and be understood” (Luoma 2004). Nevertheless, in the last two decades, with communicative and task based approaches as mainstream language teaching methodologies, assessments is focusing on authentic communicative contexts in which not only knowledge, but also skills and attitudes are required (Keeves 1994; Parrondo Rodríguez 2004). A growing number of publications is offering us models and patterns in order to simulate this authentic reality in the classroom (such as Cabré and Gómez de Enterría 2006 for Spanish), but without inquiring into the criteria, scales and templates suitable for a flexible evaluation of performance assessment of language competence in this communicative context in combination with a focus on form, apart from the templates based on and limited to the Common Framework of European Reference for Languages (CEFR(L)), which in our analysis will turn out to be too rigid when assessing both communicative output and focus on form (see also CITO/SLO 2010), as well as regarding the combination of formative and summative evaluation and in a analytic/synthetic way, two other criteria in current assessment, apart from validity, reliability and transparency (Dochy and Gijbels 2010). Therefore, after presenting briefly the state of the art on performance assessment and the objectives of current language teaching, we will evaluate a corpus of assessment templates with respect to the abovementioned criteria. Based on the data of our analysis, we will finally propose flexible criteria and templates for a communicative assessment of oral language skills, allowing us to adapt the assessment to the demands of any language course without losing sight of the five criteria. So yes, assessing speaking with focus both on form and communicative output is possible. References Cabré, María Teresa & Josefa Gómez de Enterría. 2006. La enseñanza de los lenguajes de especialidad. La simulación global. [Teaching language for special purposes. The global simulation]. Madrid: Gredos. CITO/SLO 2010. Toetsen en beoordelen met het ERK [Testing en assessing with the CEFR]. Arnhem/Enschede. Dochy, Filip & Dominique Gijbels. 2010. Evaluatie. In Steven Janssens (ed.), Leren en onderwijzen [Learning and Teaching], 121-175. Leuven: Acco. Keeves, John P. 1994. Methods of assessment in schools. In Torsten Husén & T. Neville Postlewhaite (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education, 362-370. Oxford & New York: Pergamon Press. Luoma, Sari. 2004. Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. O’ Sullivan, Barry (ed.). 2011. Language testing: theories and practices (Palgrave advances in linguistics). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Parrondo Rodríguez, José Ramón. 2004. Modelos, tipos y escalas de evaluación [Models, types and evaluation scales]. In Jesús Sánchez Lobato & Isabel Santos Gargallo (eds.), Vademécum para la formación de profesores. Enseñar español como segunda lengua (L2)/lengua extranjera (LE) [Handbook for teacher education. Teaching Spanish as a second language / foreign language], 967-982. Madrid: SGEL.status: publishe