Lan Luo

DOI Number
First page
Last page


Authenticity is the primary factor affecting test validity in ESP (English for Specific Purposes) test. While ensuring the authenticity of test tasks, pursuing authenticity in assessment criteria has received more and more attention. Studies have shown that experts in the professional field use different assessment criteria when assessing candidates’ communicative competence in a particular professional context. It is certainly the case that the construct of communicative competence informing practice in language testing is different from the views of communication informing the communication literature in the professional setting, and hence the views of educators in that field. Rapprochement between these two perspectives is clearly desirable. This paper reviews the history and development of ESP testing, emphasizes the necessity of balancing the different scoring views between linguists and professional experts from the perspective of EMP (English for Medical Purposes) oral test, and discusses the implication of pursuing authenticity in ESP testing as well as ESP teaching.


ESP testing, authenticity, assessment criteria

Full Text:



Abdul Raof, A. H. 2011. An alternative approach to rating scale development. In B. O’Sullivan (Ed.), Language testing theories and practices (pp. 151–163). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Bachman, L. F. 1990. Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. 1991. What does language testing have to offer? TESOL Quarterly 25: 671-704.

Bachman, L. and Palmer, A. 1996. Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brown, A. 1995. The effect of rater variables in the development of an occupation-specific language performance test. Language Testing 12: 1–15.

Carter, D. 1983. Some propositions about ESP. The ESP Journal 2:131-137.

Cumming, A. 2001. ESL/EFL writing instructors’ practices for assessment: General or specific purposes. Language Testing 18: 207–224.

Davies, A. 2001. The Logic of Testing Language for Specific Purposes. Language Testing 18(2): 133-147.

Douglas, D. 2000. Assessing Languages for Specific Purposes. Cambridge Language Assessment.

Dudley-Evans, T. 1998. Developments in English for Specific Purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4-5.

Erdősy, M. U. 2005. Responding to native and non-native writers of English: A history professor’s indigenous criteria for grading and feedback in an undergraduate Sinology course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Toronto, Toronto.

Erdősy, M. U. 2009. Chasing Proteus: Identifying indigenous assessment criteria in academic settings. In A. Brown & K. Hill (Eds.), Tasks and criteria in performance assessment (pp. 111–133). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.

Elder, C. 1993. How do subject specialists construe classroom language proficiency? Language Testing 10(3), 235-354.

Elder, C. 2001. Assessing the language proficiency of teachers: are there any border controls? Language Testing 18 (2): 149–170.

Elder, C. & McNamara, T. 2016. The hunt for “indigenous criteria” in assessing communication in the physiotherapy workplace. Language Testing 33(2), 153-174.

Fulcher, G., Davidson, F., & Kemp, J. 2011. Effective rating scale development for speaking tests: Performance decision trees. Language Testing 28(1), 5–29.

Halliday, M. A. K., A. McIntosh & P. Strevens. 1964. The Linguistic Science and Language Teaching. London: Longman.

Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. 1987. English for Specific Purposes: A learner-centered approach. Cambridge University Press, 19.

Institute of Air Navigation Services. 1994. PELA: A test in the proficiency in English language for air traffic control. Luxembourg: Institute of Air Navigation Services.

Jacoby, S. 1998. Science as performance: socializing scientific discourse through conference talk rehearsals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

Jacoby, S, & McNamara, T. 1999. Locating competence. English for Specific Purposes 18(3): 203-241.

Jordan, R. 1997. English for Academic Purposes: A guide and resources book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kim, H. 2013. Exploring the construct of radiotelephony communication: A critique of the ICAO English testing policy from the perspective of Korean aviation experts. Papers in Language Testing and Assessment 2(2), 103–119.

Lewkowicz, J. A. 2000. Authenticity in language testing: Some outstanding questions. Language testing 17(1): 43-64.

McNamara, T. 1996. Measuring Second Language Performance. London: Longman.

Morrow, K. 1991. Evaluating communicative tests. In Anivan, S., editor, Current developments in language testing. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre, 111-18.

O’Hagan, S., Pill, J. & Zhang, Y. 2016. Extending the scope of speaking assessment criteria in a specific-purpose language test: Operationalizing a health professional perspective. Language Testing 33(2), 195-216.

Pill, J. 2016. Drawing on indigenous criteria for more authentic assessment in a specific-purpose language test: Health professionals interacting with patients. Language Testing 33(2), 175-193.

Plough, I., Briggs, S., &Van Boonn, S. 2010. A multimethod analysis of criteria used to assess the speaking proficiency of graduate student instructors. Language Testing 27: 235-260.

Rea-Dickins, P. 1987. Testing doctors’ written communicative competence: an experimental technique in English for specialist purposes. Quantitative Linguistics 34: 185-218.

Robinson,P. 1991. ESP today: a practitioner's guide. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International.

Stansfield, C.W. 2008. Lecture ‘Where we have been and where we should go’. Language testing 25(3): 311-326.

Stansfield, C. W., Scott, M. L., & Kenyon, D.M. 1990. Spanish - English Verbatim Translation Exam. Final Report. Ashington: CAL.

Stansfield, C. W., Scott, M. L., & Kenyon, D.M. 1992. The measurement of translation ability. The Modern Language Journal 76(4): 455-467.

Stansfield, C. W., Scott, M. L., & Kenyon, D.M. 1996. Examining validity in a performance test: The Listening Summary Translation Exam (LSTE) - Spanish version. Language Testing 13(1): 83-110.

Spence-brown, R. 2001. The eye of beholder: Authenticity in an embedded assessment task. Language Testing 18(4), 463-481.

Spolsky, B. 1995. Measured words: The development of objective language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Strevens, P. 1988. ESP after twenty years: a re-appraisal. In M. Tickoo (ed.), ESP: State of the Art, 1-13.

Widdowson, H.G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H.G. 1981. English for Specific Purposes: Criteria for Course Design. In Selinker, L. (ed.). English for Academic and Technical Purposes: Studies in honor of Louis Trimble. Rowley, MA. Newbury House.

Wu, W., & Stansfield, C.W. 2001. Towards authenticity of task in test development. Language Testing 18(2), 187-206.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP1902159L


  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)

ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)


University of Niš

Univerzitetski trg 2, 18000 Niš, Serbia
Phone:    +381 18 257 095
Telefax:  +381 18 257 950

© 2013 by University of Niš, Serbia