Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-b5k59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T22:49:47.545Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Proficiency

Understanding the Construct

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

James P. Lantolf  and
William Frawley
James P. Lantolf
Affiliation:
University of Delaware
William Frawley
Affiliation:
University of Delaware
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article we argue against a definitional approach to oral proficiency and in favor of a principled approach based on sound theoretical considerations. We first identify four problematic frends in the oral proficiency movement as it is currently conceived: the tail wagging the dog, false authenticity, premature institutionalization, and the psychometric posture. Thereafter, we offer the rudiments of a principled theory of oral proficiency, based on the theory of higher forms of human cognitive activity developed by the Vygotskyan school of psycholinguistics. The theory compels us to bring into focus such factors as open systems, the individual speaker, functional systems, and intersubjectivity. From this perspective, we argue that if the construct of oral proficiency is to have any significance at all for language teaching and testing, researchers must come to understand what it means for real speakers (natives as well as nonnatives) to interact with other real speakers in the everyday world of human activity rather than in the world circumscribed by language tests.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 1988 , pp. 181 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (1982). ACTFL provisional proficiency guidelines. Hastings-on-Hudson, NY: Author.Google Scholar
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (1986). ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Hastings-on-Hudson, NY: Author.Google Scholar
Bachman, L. F., & Savignon, S. J. (1986). The evaluation of communicative language proficiency: A critique of the ACTFL oral interview. Modern Language Journal, 70, 380–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bissert, N. (1979). Education, class, and language ideology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1986). Too many words: Length of utterance and pragmatic failure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 8, 165–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.-C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society, and culture. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Bragger, J. D. (1986). Teaching for proficiency: Are we ready? Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 18, 11–14.Google Scholar
Byrnes, H. (1986). Proficiency: Concepts and developments. Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 18, 9–10.Google Scholar
Byrnes, H. (1987). Second language acquisition: Insights from a proficiency orientation. In Byrnes, H. & Canale, M. (Eds.), Defining and developing proficiency: Guidelines, implementations and concepts (pp. 107–131). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook.Google Scholar
Cole, M., & Traupmann, K. (1981). Comparative cognitive research: Learning from a learning disabled child. In Collins, W. A. (Ed.), Aspects of the development of competence (pp. 125–154). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Conant, J. B. (1964). Two modes of thought: My encounters with science and education. New York: Trident.Google Scholar
Cummins, J., Swain, M., Nakajima, K., Handscombe, J., Green, D., & Tran, C. (1984). Linguistic interdependence among Japanese and Vietnamese immigrant students. In Rivera, C. (Ed.), Communicative competence approaches to language proficiency assessment: Research and application (pp. 60–81). Clevedon, England: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1984). Elbow room: The varieties of free will worth wanting. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Duran, R. P. (1984). Some implications of communicative competence research for integrative proficiency testing. In Rivera, C. (Ed.), Communicative competence approaches to language proficiency assessment: Research and application (pp. 44–58). Clevedon, England: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Edelsky, C. (1986). [Review of Language proficiency and academic achievement.] Language in Society, 5, 123–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelsky, C., & Draper, K. (in press). Reading/“reading”; writing/“writing”; text/“text.” In Petrosky, A. (Ed.), Reading and writing: Theory and research. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Egan, K. (1983). Education and psychology: Plato, Piaget, and scientific psychology. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. (1983). The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, V. (1987). From defining to developing proficiency: A look at the decisions. In Byrnes, H. & Canale, M. (Eds.), Defining and developing proficiency: Guidelines, implementations and concepts (pp. 25–73). Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook.Google Scholar
Genesee, F. (1984). Psycholinguistic aspects. In Rivera, C. (Ed.), Communicative competence approaches to language proficiency assessment: Research and applications (pp. 134–145). Clevedon, England: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Higgs, T. V. (1986). Proficiency assessment and the humanities. Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 18, 6–9.Google Scholar
Higgs, T. V., & Clifford, R. (1982). The push toward communication. In Higgs, T. V. (Ed.), Curriculum, competence and the foreign language teacher (pp. 51–79). Skokie, IL: National Textbook.Google Scholar
Ilyenkov, E. V. (1977). Dialectical logic: Essays on its history and theory. Moscow: Progress.Google Scholar
Ingram, D. E. (1985). Assessing proficiency: An overview of some aspects of testing. In Hyltenstam, K. & Pienemann, M. (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 215–276). San Diego, CA: College-Hill.Google Scholar
Jarvis, G. (1986). Proficiency testing: A matter of false hopes? Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 18, 20–21.Google Scholar
Kramsch, C. J. (1986). Proficiency versus achievement: Reflections on the proficiency movement. Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin, 18, 22–24.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1970). The logic of non-standard English. In Williams, F. (Ed.), Language and poverty. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Ahmed, M. K. (1987). Psycholinguistic perspectives on interlanguage variation: A Vygotskyan analysis. Paper presented at the Conference on Variation in Second Language Acquisition, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Frawley, W. (1985a). Oral-proficiency testing: A critical analysis. Modern Language Journal, 69, 337–345.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Frawley, W. (1985b). Proficiency—How to make a native speaker. Paper presented at the Symposium on New Dimensions on Proficiency, Foreign Service Institute, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C., Rose, S., & Kamin, L. J. (1984). Not in our genes: Biology, ideology and human nature. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Lowe, P. Jr., (1986). Proficiency: Panacea, framework, process? A reply to Kramsch, Schulz, and particularly, to Bachman and Savignon. Modern Language Journal, 70, 391–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1973). The working brain: An introduction to neuropsychology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1979). The making of mind: A personal account of Soviet psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Magnan, S. S. (1986). Assessing speaking proficiency in the undergraduate curriculum: Data from French. Foreign Language Annals, 19, 429–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmann, D., Griffen, P., & Cole, M. (1984). Social constraints in laboratory and classroom tasks. In Rogoff, B. & Lave, J. (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 172–193). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ochsner, R. (1979). A poetics of second-language acquisition. Language Learning, 29, 53–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omaggio, A. C. (1986). Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. (1985). Plasticity and invariance in cognitive development. In Mehler, J. & Fox, R. (Eds.), Neonate cognition: Beyond the blooming buzzing confusion (pp. 403–415). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Reddy, M. (1979). The conduit metaphor—A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Ortony, A. (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284–324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rommetveit, R. (1985). Language acquisition as increasing linguistic structuring of experience and symbolic behavior control. In Wertsch, J. V. (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 183–204). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rommetveit, R. (1987). Psycholinguistics, hermeneutics, and cognitive science. Paper presented at the Second International Symposium on Applied Psycholinguistics, Kassel, Federal Republic of Germany.Google Scholar
Schoenfeld, A. H. (in press). Cognitive science and mathematics education: An overview. In Schoenfeld, A. H. (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education: An overview. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, R. (1986). From achievement to proficiency through classroom instruction: Some caveats. Hispania, 69, 187–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scinto, L. F. M. (1986). Written language and psychological development. Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar
Searle, J. (1984). Minds, brains, and science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Valsiner, J. (1984). Construction of the zone of proximal development in adult-child joint action: The socialization of meals. In Rogoff, B. & Wertsch, J. (Eds.), Children's learning in the zone of proximal development (pp. 65–79). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Velichkovskii, B. M. (1987). Methodological problems in cognitive psychology. Soviet Psychology, 25, 29–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vocate, D. R. (1987). The theory of A. R. Luria: Functions of spoken language in the development of higher mental processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Vollmer, H. J. (1981). Why are we interested in “general language proficiency”? In Alderson, J. C. & Hughes, A. (Eds.), Issues in language testing (pp. 152–175). London: The British Council.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1979). Consciousness as a problem in the psychology of behavior. Soviet Psychology, 17, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1984). The zone of proximal development: Some conceptual issues. In Rogoff, B. & Wertsch, J. V. (Eds.), Children's learning in the zone of proximal development (pp. 7–18). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social development of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V., Minick, N., & Arns, F. (1984). The creation of context in joint problem solving. In Rogoff, B. & Lave, J. (Eds.), Everyday cognition: its development in social context (pp. 151–177). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar