Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:34:42.803Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Testing Language Aptitude

A Commentary on Batteries and Reanalysis of Constructs

from Part II - Aptitude Testing of Diverse Groups

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2023

By
Peter Skehan
Edited by
Zhisheng (Edward) Wen ,
Peter Skehan  and
Richard L. Sparks
Zhisheng (Edward) Wen
Affiliation:
Hong Kong Shue Yan University
Peter Skehan
Affiliation:
Institute of Education, University of London
Richard L. Sparks
Affiliation:
Mount St Joseph University
Get access

Summary

The present chapter has two general aims. The first is to survey the range of aptitude batteries and sub-tests that are discussed in the literature, and then to explore how they relate to one another and what emphases each of them contains. To achieve this, the various sub-tests will be located in terms of two dimensions: whether they are domain-specific or domain-general, and whether they require implicit or explicit processes and learning. In addition, how the different domains of sound, working memory, processing, language and learning are handled in each of the sub-tests will be explored. The second aim is to explore what insights aptitude tests might contribute to theorizing about the nature of second language learning. The different theoretical accounts will be examined, and then existing aptitude tests will be related to them, indicating clear coverage in some areas, and not very much in others. Overall, it is argued that aptitude work, viewed in this way, should be central to second language acquisition and reveal how we can understand and predict it.

Keywords

Aptitude testssecond language acquisitionMLATLLAMAHi-LABworking memorythe staged modeldomain-specificdomain-general
Type
Chapter
Information
Language Aptitude Theory and Practice , pp. 208 - 246
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. R. (2010). Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications, 7th ed. New York: Worth Publishing.Google Scholar
Bokander, L. (This volume, Chapter 5). Exploring the predictive validity of the LLAMA language aptitude tests: A research synthesis.Google Scholar
Bokander, L., & Bylund, E. (2020). Probing the internal validity of LLAMA language aptitude tests. Language Learning, 70(1), 11–47.Google Scholar
Buffington, J., & Morgan-Short, . (2019). Declarative and procedural memory as individual differences in second language aptitude. In Wen, Z., Skehan, P., Biedron, A., Li, S., & Sparks, R. L. (eds.), Language Aptitude: Advancing Theory, Testing, Research and Practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1962). The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training. In Glaser, R. (ed.), Training Research and Education. Pittsburg, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 87–136.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1973). Implications of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign language teaching. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2, 5–14.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-Analytic Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. (1959). Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT). New York: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Chan, E., & Skehan, P. (2011). Developing an aptitude test based on Pienemann’s Processability Theory (Technical Report No.1). English Dept., Chinese University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Chan, E., Skehan, P., & Gong, G. (2011). Working memory, phonemic coding ability and foreign language aptitude: Potential for construction of specific language aptitude tests – the case of Cantonese. Ilho do Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures and Cultural Studies, 60(1), 45–73.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2019). The future of language aptitude research. In Wen, Z., Skehan, P., Biedroń, A., Li, S., & Sparks, R. (eds.), Language Aptitude: Advancing Theory, Testing, Research and Practice. New York: Routledge, pp. 317–329.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. J. (2019). Cognitive language aptitude. Language Learning, 69(S1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12322Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., & Kim, K. M. (2021). The contributions of implicit-statistical learning aptitude to implicit second language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(3), 606–634.Google Scholar
Granena, G. (2013). Cognitive aptitude for second language learning and the LLAMA Language Aptitude Test. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive Periods, Language Aptitude, and Ultimate L2 Attainment.. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 105–130.Google Scholar
Granena, G. (2019). Cognitive aptitudes and L2 speaking proficiency: Links between LLAMA and Hi-LAB. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(2), 313–336.Google Scholar
Granena, G. (2020). Implicit Language Aptitude. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Granena, G., & Yilmaz, Y. (2019). Corrective feedback and the role of implicit sequence learning ability in L2 online performance. Language Learning, 69(S1), 127–156.Google Scholar
Green, P. S. (1975). Aptitude testing: An ongoing experiment. Audio-Visual Language Journal, 12, 205–210.Google Scholar
Grigorenko, E. L., Sternberg, R. J., & Ehrman, M. (2002). A theory-based approach to the measurement of foreign language learning ability: The CANAL-F theory and test. Modern Language Journal, 84(3), 390–405.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Hattori, H. (2006). Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research, 22(2), 269–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, M., Golonka, E., Tseng, A., & Campbell, S. (This volume, Chapter 4). The High-Level Language Aptitude Test Battery (Hi-LAB): Development, Validation, and Use.Google Scholar
Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. (2016). Miniature natural language learning in L2 acquisition research. In Granena, G., Jackson, D. O., & Yilmaz, Y. (eds.), Cognitive Individual Differences in Second Language Processing and Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 41–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, W. (1986). Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Knowlton, B. J., Mengels, J. A., & Squire, L. R. (1996). A neostriatal learning system in humans. Science, 273, 1399–1402.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Aptitude and attitude in relation to second language acquisition and learning. In Diller, K. C., K. C. (ed.), Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp. 155–175.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2015). The associations between language aptitude and second language grammar acquisition: A meta-analytic review of five decades of research. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 385–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S., & Qian, J. (2021). Exploring syntactic priming as a measure of implicit language aptitude. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(3), 1–32.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Hughes, M. M., Campbell, S. G., et al. (2013). Hi-LAB: A new measure of aptitude for high-level language proficiency. Language Learning, 63(3), 530–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2005). A unified model of language acquisition. In Kroll, J. F. & De Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 49–67.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2005). LLAMA Language Aptitude Tests. Swansea: Lognostics.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2011). First and Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and Procedural Determinants of Second Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Perruchet, P. (2021). Why is the componential construct of implicit language aptitude so difficult to capture? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(3), 677–691.Google Scholar
Petersen, C. R., & Al-Haik, A. (1976). The development of the Defense Language Aptitude Battery (DLAB). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 36, 369–380.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pimsleur, P. (1966). Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB). New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Pimsleur, P. (1968). Language aptitude testing. In Davies, A. (ed.), Language Testing Symposium: A Psycholinguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
The R Project for Statistical Computing. (2020). The R Project for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistics. https://R-Project.org/.Google Scholar
Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 6, 855–863.Google Scholar
Reed, D., & Stansfield, C. (This volume, Chapter 2). The MLAT-Elementary: History, Adaptations and Current Uses.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2002). Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 113–133.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73.Google Scholar
Rogers, V., Meara, P., & Rogers, B. (This volume, Chapter 3). Testing language aptitude: LLAMA evolution and refinement.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & Slabakova, R. (2018). The generative approach to SLA and its place in modern second language studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(3), 417–442.Google Scholar
Sasaki, M. (1996). Second Language Proficiency, Foreign Language Aptitude, and Intelligence: Quantitative and Qualitative Analyses. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Shallice, T. (1982). Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 298 , 199–209.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1988). A comparison of first and foreign language learning ability. ESOL Department, Institute of Education, UCL: Working Documents No. 8Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual Differences in Second Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2015). Foreign language aptitude and its relationship with grammar: A critical overview. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 367–384.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2016). Foreign language aptitude, acquisitional sequences, and psycholinguistic processes. In Granena, G., Jackson, D., & Yilmaz, Y. (eds.), Cognitive Individual Differences in L2 Processing and Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 17–40.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2019). Language aptitude implicates language and cognitive skills. In Wen, Z., Skehan, P., Biedroń, A., Li, S., & Sparks, R. (eds.), Language Aptitude: Advancing Theory, Testing, Research and Practice. New York: Routledge, pp. 56–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sparks, R. (2012). Individual differences in L2 learning and long-term L1–L2 relationships. Language Learning, 62(Suppl. 2), 5–27.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. (This volume, Chapter 11). The Linguistic Coding Differences Hypothesis (LCDH) and L2 Learning: A Thirty-Year RetrospectiveGoogle Scholar
Suzuki, Y., & DeKeyser, R. (2017). The interface of explicit and implicit knowledge in a second language. Language Learning, 67(4), 747–797.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2015). The declarative/procedural model: A neurobiologically motivated theory of first and second language. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction, 2nd ed. London: Routledge, pp. 135–158.Google Scholar
Wesche, M. B. (1981). Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems. In Diller, K. C. (ed.), Individual Differences and Universals in Language Learning Aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×