Abstract
The construct of general-purpose oral proficiency tests has been defined on the basis of the theoretical models of second language (L2) communication established by language specialists. In contrast, the perspectives on the L2 communication ability of linguistic laypersons (non-specialists in language testing and teaching) have not been incorporated into language assessment. However, it is important to understand how linguistic laypersons conceptualize L2 communication ability because they are the eventual interlocutors of L2 speakers in most real-world contexts. This study explores the features that influence linguistic laypersons' evaluative judgments of L2 oral communication ability. Four graduate students taking up disciplines other than applied linguistics and Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) participated in the study. They witnessed 10 speakers' performances on the College English Test-Spoken English Test and indicated their impressions of each test-taker's communication ability. Three of the participants' ratings were moderately correlated with the test scores, whereas the ratings of one participant were weakly correlated. Their retrospective verbal protocols were also collected and analyzed. Fluency appeared to affect rater impressions the most, but grammar and vocabulary were shown to be peripheral factors in their judgments. Their protocols also revealed that the participants attended to various non-linguistic features, which implies that language proficiency does not guarantee a positive evaluation from linguistic laypersons. This study has also showed individual differences in the rating and protocols - a sign of the linguistic laypersons' complex subjective judgments. It is suggested that their unique criteria can be used to supplement conventional linguistically oriented assessment criteria and accurately predict linguistic laypersons' impressions in the real-life context.
