Carol A. Chapelle - The Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics

25 Paige, R. M. (Ed.). (1993). Education for the intercultural experience. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.

26 Paige, R. M. (2004). Instrumentation in intercultural training. In D. Landis, J. M. Bennett, & M. J. Bennett (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (3rd ed., pp. 85–128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

27 Paige, R. M. (2006). Culture learning. In R. M. Paige, A. D. Cohen, B. Kappler, J. C. Chi, & J. P. Lassegard, Maximizing study abroad: A student's guide to strategies for language and culture learning and use (2nd ed., pp. 39–41). Minneapolis: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.

28 Paige, R. M., Rong, J., Zheng, W., & Kappler, B. (2006). Culture Learning Strategies Inventory. In R. M. Paige, A. D. Cohen, B. Kappler, J. C. Chi, & J. P. Lassegard, Maximizing study abroad: A student's guide to strategies for language and culture learning and use (2nd ed., pp. 29–34). Minneapolis: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.

29 Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in minority group adolescents. Journal of Early Adolescence, 9(1–2), 34–49.

30 Phinney, J. S. (1992). The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure: A new scale for use with diverse groups. Journal of Adolescent Research, 7(2), 156–76.

31 Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 271–81.

32 Savicki, V. (Ed.). (2008). Developing intercultural competence and transformation: Theory, research, and application in international education. Herndon, VA: Stylus.

33 Sternberg, R. J., & Detterman, D. K. (Eds.). (1986). What is intelligence? Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

34 Suinn, R. M., Rickard‐Figueroa, K., Lew, S., & Vigil, P. (1987). The Suinn‐Lew Asian Self‐Identity Acculturation Scale: An initial report. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47(2), 401–7.

35 Umaña‐Taylor, A. J., Yazedijian, A., & Bámaca‐Gómez, M. (2004). Developing the ethnic identity scale using Eriksonian and social identity perspectives. Identity, 4, 9–38.

36 Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., & Koh, C. (2009). Cultural intelligence and scale development. In M. A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and intercultural competence: Exploring the cross‐cultural dynamics within organizations (pp. 233–54). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

37 Van Dyne, L., Ang, S., Ng, K. Y., Rockstuhl, T., Tan, M. L., & Koh, C. (2012). Sub‐dimensions of the four factor model of cultural intelligence: Expanding the conceptualization and measurement of cultural intelligence. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(4), 295–313.

38 Ward, C., Bochner, S., & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock (2nd ed.). London, England: Routledge.

39 Ward, C., & Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of sociocultural adaptation. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 23(4), 659–77.

40 Wilson, J., Ward, C., Fetvadjiev, V. H., & Bethel, A. (2017). Measuring cultural competencies: The development and validation of a revised measure of sociocultural adaptation. Journal of Cross‐Cultural Psychology, 48(10), 1475–506.

41 Yamada, A.‐M. (1998). Multidimensional identification. In T. M. Singelis (Ed.), Teaching about culture, ethnicity & diversity: Exercises and planned activities (pp. 141–5). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

1 Cultural Intelligence Scale. (n.d.). What is CQ? Retrieved March 28, 2019 from https://culturalq.com/

2 Intercultural Development Inventory. (n.d.). The roadmap to intercultural competence using the IDI. Retrieved March 28, 2019 from https://idiinventory.com/

1 Based in part on R. M. Paige and E. S. Madden (2012). Assessment of cultural knowledge. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. John Wiley & Sons Inc., with permission.

LIA PLAKANS

Assessment of integrated skills refers to the use of test tasks that combine two or more language skills to simulate authentic language‐use situations. In such assessment, task demands aim to overlap and synthesize combinations of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. Although possibly more common in classroom assessments, such tasks are now included in larger‐scale tests, for example:

1 Internet‐Based Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL iBT) from the Educational Testing Service is employed as a measure of English‐language use and comprehension in university classroom contexts for the purpose of admission into English‐speaking higher education programs. This test includes tasks that integrate writing with reading and listening as well as speaking tasks that include reading and listening.

2 Diplôme approfondi de langue française (DALF), managed by the Centre international d'études pédagogiques, is used as a French‐language proficiency measure for university study and employment. The high proficiency level assessment integrates multiple skills—reading, writing, listening, and speaking—with tasks such as summarization, discussion, and argumentation.

3 The College Board's Advanced Placement (AP) Spanish Examination in the United States is given to determine if college foreign‐language credit in Spanish can be granted to students completing high school. Writing tasks include an integrated essay based on reading two texts and listening to an audio file.

The view of skills as integrated contrasts with the long‐standing conceptualization of language as four skills, plus grammar and vocabulary, which has been a mainstay in language testing for some time (Carroll, 1961). The current trend of integrated skills assessment is focused on simulating the processes and performances demanded by academic contexts, where writing or speaking is tied to content that students have listened to or read. Thus, it has arisen from a practical view of language tests designed to readily provide scores that can be interpreted as a language ability needed to complete academic work. With this impetus, subsequent research sought to further define the construct of what this ability is and find evidence that integrated tasks tap into this construct. The outcome thus far, suggests that integrated assessment tasks tap into performance‐based skills of speaking or writing, general language knowledge of vocabulary and comprehension (Sawaki, Quinlan, & Lee, 2013), and ability to synthesize content and skills through discourse synthesis. Less certain is how the scores from these tasks can provide inferences about listening or reading, which is clearly required in the process of completing the tasks (Zhu, Li, Yu, Cheong, & Liao, 2016). Thus, while the depth and breadth of research on integrated skills tasks has grown significantly in the past decade, scholars express the need to continue the search to better define these tasks (Knoch & Sitajalabhorn, 2013), develop new innovative approaches to them (Plakans, Liao, & Wang, 2018), and establish reliable scoring that reflects the intended integrated language ability (Gebril, 2010; Gebril & Plakans, 2014).

In most cases, integrated assessment tasks are performance based, leading to writing or speaking, rather than completion of selected response items such as multiple‐choice questions. The integration of skills in assessment may occur during the process of composing the constructed response; for example, in a speaking task that includes summarization, the test taker is required to use the cognitive processes involved in both reading and speaking. Integrated tasks may also require that the final product from the task include integration; for example, the TOEFL task requires that content from listening and reading texts be combined in the written summary.