Chapter 1　Introduction

1.1　Need for the study

1.1.1　Students'perspective

1.1.2　Teachers'perspective

1.1.3　Purpose of the study

1.2　Configuration of the study

1.2.1　Study procedure

1.2.2　Study questions

1.3　Significance of the study

1.4　Layout of the book

1.5　Summary

Chapter 2　Literature Review

2.1　Fundamentals of oral proficiency

2.1.1　Speech communication and its characteristics

2.1.2　Essence of speech communication

2.1.2.1　Language use versus usage

2.1.2.2　Communicative competence versus linguistic competence

2.1.2.3　Accuracy versus fluency

2.1.2.4　Correctness versus appropriateness

2.1.2.5　Proficiency versus achievement

2.1.2.6　Process versus product

2.1.2.7　Synthetic approach versus analytic approach

2.1.2.8　The learner versus the teacher

2.1.3　Components of oral proficiency

2.2　Classification of oral rating scales

2.2.1　Holistic rating scales

2.2.2　Analytic rating scales

2.2.3　Combination of holistic ＆ analytic rating scales

2.2.4　Integration of holistic ＆ analytic rating scales

2.2.5　Using analytic rating scales for the project

2.3　Summary

Chapter 3　Study Bases

3.1　Empirical basis

3.1.1　Syllabus description

3.1.2　Oral tests of CET ＆ TEM

3.2　Theoretical basis

3.2.1　CLA model

3.2.1.1　Language competence

3.2.1.2　Strategic competence

3.2.1.3　Psychophysiological mechanisms

3.2.1.4　Significance of CLA to OARS

3.2.1.5　Trait factors of CLA

3.2.2　Cohen's rating scale for pragmatic speaking

3.2.3　Nunn's rating scales for small group interaction

3.2.3.1　Nunn's rating scales of interactive skills

3.2.3.2　Nunn's rating scales of intelligibility

3.2.3.3　Significance of Nunn's rating scales to OARS

3.2.4　Reconsiderations on strategic competence

3.2.4.1　Classification of strategic competence

3.2.4.2　Evaluation of nonverbal communication

3.3　Summary

Chapter 4　Construction of OARS

4.1　Needs analysis

4.1.1　Basic considerations on band descriptors

4.1.2　Questionnaire construction

4.1.2.1　The trial questionnaire

4.1.2.2　Demographic analysis

4.1.2.3　Data analysis

4.1.3 Survey results

4.1.3.1　Demographic analysis

4.1.3.2　The OARS questionnaire

4.1.3.3　Data analysis

4.2　Description of OARS

4.2.1　Framework of OARS

4.2.2　Band descriptors of OARS

4.2.2.1　Band descriptors of organizational competence

4.2.2.2　Band descriptors of pragmatic competence

4.2.2.3　Band descriptors of flexible interaction

4.2.2.4　Band descriptors of nonverbal communication

4.3　Sample rating

4.3.1　Sample rating Ⅰ—role-play

4.3.1.1　Performance analysis

4.3.1.2　Suggested rating

4.3.2　Sample rating Ⅱ—discussion

4.3.2.1　Performance analysis

4.3.2.2　Suggested rating

4.4　Summary

Chapter 5　The Pilot Validation Study

5.1　Research purpose

5.2　Research subjects and task

5.3　Research operation

5.4　Data analysis

5.4.1　Prior consideration

5.4.1.1　Candidates'perspective

5.4.1.2　Teachers'perspective

5.4.2　The profound study

5.4.2.1　Analysis of reliability estimates

5.4.2.2　Analysis of descriptive statistics

5.4.2.3　Analysis of construct validity

5.4.2.4　Analysis of external validity

5.5　Discussion

5.6　Summary

Chapter 6　The Field Validation Study

6.1　Research purpose

6.2　Research subjects and task

6.3　Research operation

6.3.1　Process of experimental tests

6.3.2　Rater training

6.3.3　Collection of data

6.4　Data analysis

6.4.1　Study on six types of candidates

6.4.1.1　Analysis of reliability estimates

6.4.1.2　Analysis of descriptive statistics

6.4.1.3　Analysis of construct validity

6.4.1.4　Analysis of external validity

6.4.2　Study on 180 candidates

6.4.2.1　Analyses of reliability estimates

6.4.2.2　Analyses of descriptive statistics

6.4.2.3　Analyses of construct validity

6.4.2.4　Analyses of external validity

6.4.3　Characteristics of oral English proficiency of Chinese college students

6.4.4　Comparability study on different types of candidates

6.5　Discussion

6.6　Summary

Chapter 7　Conclusions and Recommendations

7.1　Validation results

7.2　Washback effects

7.2.1　Design of OARS as a model

7.2.2　Precautions in application of OARS

7.2.3　Contribution of OARS to oral instruction

7.3　Existing problems

7.3.1　Problems with OARS itself

7.3.2　Problems with the validation study

7.4　Further research

7.5　Summary

Bibliography

Appendix 1　Empirical Basis

Appendix 1.1　Requirements for Oral Proficiency of English Majors(Chinese version)

Appendix 1.2　Requirements for Oral Proficiency ofnon-English Majors(Chinese version)

Appendix 1.3　Requirements for Pronunciation of English Majors at Band 2 ＆ Band 4(Chinese version)

Appendix 1.4　Rating Scale ＆ Range Descriptions of CET-SET(Chinese version)

Appendix 1.5　Range Descriptions of TEM4-Oral(Chinese version)

Appendix 1.6　Range Descriptions of TEM8-Oral(Chinese version)

Appendix 2　Questionnaires

Appendix 2.1　OARS Trial Questionnaire

Appendix 2.2　OARS Teachers'Questionnaire

Appendix 2.3　OARS Students'Questionnaire

Appendix 2.4　Candidate's Questionnaire—the Pilot Study

Appendix 3　Experiments

Appendix 3.1　Experimental Test of Sample Rating Ⅰ

Appendix 3.2　Experimental Test of Sample Rating Ⅱ

Appendix 3.3　Experimental Test of the Validation Study—Role Cards

Appendix 4　Data of the Validation Study

Appendix 4.1　Candidates'Raw Scores on ORAL,TEM4 ＆ TEM8—the Pilot Study

Appendix 4.2　Raw Scores of Candidates'Ratings—the Pilot Study

Appendix 4.3　Raw Scores of Raters'Detailed Ratings—the Pilot Study

Appendix 4.4　Raw Scores of Teachers'Rough Ratings—the Pilot Study

Appendix 4.5　Sub-total Correlation Matrix—the Pilot Study

Appendix 4.6　Sub-total Correlation Matrix for English(key)Candidates—the Field Study

Appendix 4.7　Sub-total Correlation Matrix for Arts(key)Candidates—the Field Study

Appendix 4.8　Sub-total Correlation Matrix for Science(key)Candidates—the Field Study

Appendix 4.9　Sub-total Correlation Matrix for Arts(local)Candidates—the Field Study

Appendix 4.10　Sub-total Correlation Matrix for Science(local)Candidates—the Field Study

Appendix 4.11　Sub-total Correlation Matrix of RlT for 180 Candidates—the Field Study

Appendix 4.12　Sub-total Correlation Matrix of RAT for 180 Candidates—the Field Study

Figure 2.1　Allwright's diagram of communicative competence ＆ linguistic competence

Figure 2.2　Weir ＆ Bygate's framework of oral proficiency components

Figure 2.3 Rating scale of IELTS Oral

Figure 2.4 Oral rating scale of TEEP

Figure 2.5 Oral rating scale of American FSI interview

Figure 3.1 Inner structure of language competence

Figure 3.2　Trait factors of CLA

Figure 3.3 Cohen's rating scale for pragmatic speaking

Figure 3.4 Nunn's rating scale of turn-taking ＆ negotiation

Figure 3.5 Nunn's detailed rating scales of turn-taking ＆ negotiation

Figure 3.6 Nunn's rating scale of content of contributions

Figure 3.7 Nunn's detailed rating scales of content of contributions

Figure 3.8 Nunn's rating scale of pronunciation ＆ intonation

Figure 3.9 Nunn's detailed rating scales of pronunciation ＆ intonation

Figure 3.10　Nunn's rating scale of grammar ＆ vocabulary

Figure 3.11　Nunn's detailed rating scales of grammar ＆ vocabulary

Figure 4.1 Framework of OARS

Figure 4.2 Band descriptors of organizational competence

Figure 4.3 Band descriptors of pragmatic competence

Figure 4.4 Band descriptors of flexible interaction

Figure 4.5 Band descriptors of nonverbal communication

Figure 5.1　Histogram of RAT—the Pilot Study

Figure 6.1　Histogram of RlT for 180 candidates—the Field Study

Figure 6.2　Histogram of RAT for 180 candidates—the Field Study

Figure 7.1　Flowchart of designing OARS

Figure 7.2　Procedure of needs analysis in designing OARS

Table 2.1　Holistic oral rating scale of BEC 1

Table 2.2 Analytic oral rating scale of BEC 1

Table 2.3 Overall oral descriptors of BEC 1

Table 2.4 Rating scale of CET-SET

Table 3.1 Requirements for oral proficiency of English majors

Table 3.2 Requirements for oral proficiency of non-English majors

Table 3.3 Requirements for pronunciation of English majors at Band 2 ＆ Band 4

Table 3.4 Requirements for pronunciation of non-English majors

Table 3.5 Range descriptions of CET-SET

Table 3.6 Range descriptions of TEM4-Oral

Table 4.1　Demographic analysis of the trial questionnaire

Table 4.2 Analysis of the main component of the trial questionnaire

Table 4.3 Information of respondents to the OARS teachers'questionnaire

Table 4.4 Information of respondents to the OARS students'questionnaire

Table 4.5 Components of OARS—Teachers'perspective

Table 4.6 Components of OARS—Students'perspective

Table 4.7　t test on components of OARS(Teachers versus Students)

Table 4.8 t test on components of OARS(English majors versus non-English majors)

Table 4.9　t test on components of OARS(Arts majors versus Science majors)

Table 4.10　Reflection of language competence—sample rating Ⅰ

Table 4.11　Reflection of strategic competence—sample rating Ⅰ

Table 4.12　Reflection of scores—sample rating Ⅰ

Table 4.13　Reflection of language competence—sample rating Ⅱ

Table 4.14　Reflection of strategic competence—sample rating Ⅱ

Table 4.15 Retflection of scores—sample rating Ⅱ

Table 5.1 Statistical analysis of candidates'ratings—the Pilot Study

Table 5.2 Candidates'attitudes towards OARS—the Pilot Study

Table 5.3 Statistical analysis of raters'detailed ratings—the Pilot Study

Table 5.4　The correlation matrix of raters'detailed ratings—the Pilot Study

Table 5.5 Statistical analysis of teachers'rough ratings—the Pilot Study

Table 5.6　The correlation matrix of teachers'rough ratings—the Pilot Study

Table 5.7 Raw scores of RA—the Pilot Study

Table 5.8 Reliability estimates—the Pilot Study

Table 5.9　Descriptive statistics of the candidates'scores—the Pilot Study

Table 5.10　Sub-total correlation matrix—the Pilot Study

Table 5.11　Statistical analysis of outside measures—the Pilot Study

Table 5.12　Analysis of external validity—the Pilot Study

Table 6.1　Personal information of candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.2　Reliability estimates of six sets of scores—the Field Study

Table 6.3　Descriptive statistics of six sets of scores—the Field Study

Table 6.4 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients for English(key)candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.5 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients for Arts(key)candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.6 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients for Science(key)candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.7 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients for Arts(local)candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.8 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients for Science(local)candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.9　Descriptive statistics of RlT ＆ RAT for 180 candidates—the Field Study

Table 6.10　Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients of RlT for 60 English majors—the Field Study

Table 6.11 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients of RAT for 60 English majors—the Field Study

Table 6.12 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients of RlT for 120 non-English majors—the Field Study

Table 6.13 Analysis of concurrent validity coefficients of RAT for 120 non-English majors—the Field Study

Table 6.14　Descriptive statistics of the candidates'average scores

Table 6.15　Frequency of candidates'performance on each trait

Table 6.16　MANOVA 1:Means across six groups

Table 6.17　Post-Hoc 1:Means across six groups

Table 6.18　MANOVA 2:Means across three fields

Table 6.19　Post-Hoc 2:Means across three fields

Table 6.20　MANOVA 3:Means across two university levels

Table 6.21　t test:Means across two university levels