New ecpe speaking test

effective as of may 2009

website: http://www.hau.gr email: hau@hau.gr

Athens: 22 Massalias Street, 10680, Athens. Tel.: 210 3680900, Fax: 210 3633174
Thessaloniki: 14 Fragon Street, 54626, Thessaloniki. Tel.: 2310 557600, Fax: 2310 553925

1
 new speaking test effective as of may 2009

Overview of the new ECPE Speaking Test

The New ECPE Speaking Test consists of 5 stages and it is a two-on-two (two candidates
and two examiners) decision making task. The three-way format (three candidates and two
examiners) is used in case there is an odd number of candidates during an administration.
Examiner 1 has two different information sheets, each with a description of two options
on it (e.g. two job applicants for a teaching position). Candidate 1 receives one sheet and
Candidate 2 receives the other. One candidate presents his/her two options and receives
a recommendation about which to choose from the other. The second candidate then
presents his/her two options and receives a recommendation. Each candidate then decides
on one of his/her own two options. Of those two, they reach a consensus on one, and then
present their decision to a person of high status (e.g. a member of the International Olympic
Committee) and defend it.

Both examiners are present during the entire speaking test. Examiner 1 conducts stages 1-4
and Examiner 2 participates in stage 4 and 5.

The entire speaking test lasts approximately 25-35 minutes in the two-on-two format and
approximately 35-45 minutes in the three-way format.

Rationale
The multi-stage, decision making New ECPE Speaking Test requires candidates to
collaborate and decide on a single option and then present and defend their final decision.
It allows for both extended speech from each candidate and collaborative interaction
between the candidates. The stages build on each other, and in order to complete the
task successfully, candidates have to display the ability to summarize, take turns, ask for
clarification, weigh advantages and disadvantages, shift from an informal to a more formal
speech style, make a formal presentation, and justify and defend a decision.

Candidates are afforded the opportunity to demonstrate the full range of their linguistic
ability. They are expected to produce spoken language that is representative of C2 level on
the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR).

The semi-structured format of the ECPE Speaking Test promotes consistency in the
administration of the test.

Scoring
A candidate’s linguistic ability is assessed independently by the two examiners and
separately from the other candidate’s linguistic ability. The two examiners must then agree
on a single score for each of the candidates.

Candidates receive a holistic score. All stages are assessed except for the planning part for
the presentation (stage 4), although even then candidates are not allowed to switch to their
native language.

2 New ecpe speaking test

 new speaking test effective as of may 2009

A five-level scoring rubric is used to assess candidate performance in three different areas:
• Discourse and Interaction (development and functional range)
• Linguistic resources (range and accuracy — for both vocabulary and grammar)
• Delivery and Intelligibility (fluency and articulation)

It is very important for candidates to understand that there is no examiner involvement

during candidate-to-candidate interaction. The examiner withdraws from the task and
will interject only to remind candidates not to look at each other’s information sheet or to
remind them of the time remaining for the stage.

A STEP- BY- STEP APPROACH TO THE NEW ECPE SPEAKING TEST

STAGE 1:
Introductions and Small Talk (3-5 minutes)

Examiner 1 Examiner 2 Candidate 1 Candidate 2

• Provides brief summary • Sits in back of • Engages in • Engages in
of test testing room until conversation with conversation with
• States purpose of stage stage 4 other candidate and other candidate and
• Initiates conversation • Monitors examiner examiner
• Establishes friendly candidates • Answers short- • Answers short-
atmosphere response and response and
• Asks non-sensitive expanded-response expanded-response
personal questions—from questions questions
simple to more open- • May make • May make comments
ended ones comments on on partner’s responses.
• Draws candidates into partner’s responses May ask for clarification
conversation • May ask for • Responds to
• Provides smooth clarification comments
transition to next stage • Responds to
• Monitors candidates comments
• Monitors the time

New ecpe speaking test 3

 new speaking test effective as of may 2009
STAGE 2:
Summarizing and Recommending (5-7 minutes)
Examiner 1
Step 1 • Introduces task and gives
instructions for stage 2
• States purpose of stage
• Provides clarifications
if necessary
• Hands each candidate
information sheet with
descriptions of two options in
note form
• Warns candidates not to look at
each other’s sheets
• Instructs candidates to keep
information sheets until
end of test
• Instructs candidates note-
taking is allowed during partner’s
summarization
• Allows candidates time to
read descriptions and prepare
summary
• Monitors the time
Step 2 • Reminds candidates to use their
own words in summary
• Reminds candidates to listen
to partner’s summary carefully to
give recommendation
• Withdraws from task
• Monitors candidates
• Monitors the time
Step 3 • Asks candidates to state which
of their own two options they
choose and think of reasons why
4 New ecpe speaking test
Candidate 1
• Becomes familiar with
bullet points on information
sheet
• Distinguishes between
positive and negative
points
• Comes up with novel
language to paraphrase
and connect bullet points
• Prepares summary
silently
• Summarizes bullet points
for 2 options to other
candidate in his/her own
words
• Uses connected, novel
language
• Listens to summary
• Recommends one of
other candidate’s 2
options and may provide
brief reasons based on
partner’s summary
• Uses novel language
• States option
Candidate 2
• Becomes familiar
with bullet points on
information sheet
• Distinguishes between
positive and negative
points
• Comes up with novel
language to paraphrase
and connect bullet
points
• Prepares summary
silently
• Listens to summary
• Recommends one
of other candidate’s 2
options and may provide
brief reasons based on
partner’s summary
• Uses novel language
• Summarizes bullet
points for 2 options to
other candidate in his/
her own words
• Uses connected, novel
language
• States option
 new speaking test effective as of may 2009
STAGE 3:
Consensus Reaching (5-7 minutes)
Examiner 1 Candidate 1
• Gives instructions for stage 3 • Participates in consensus
• States purpose of stage process
• Reminds candidates not • Compares and contrasts
to look at each other’s • Collaborates with other
information sheet candidate to assess strengths
• Withdraws from task and weaknesses of 2 options
• Monitors candidates • Maintains point of view
• Monitors the time • May concede arguments
• Collaborates with other
candidate to decide on one
option
New ecpe speaking test
Candidate 2
• Participates in consensus
process
• Compares and contrasts
• Collaborates with other
candidate to assess strengths
and weaknesses of 2 options
• Maintains point of view
• May concede arguments
• Collaborates with other
candidate to decide on one
option
5
 new speaking test effective as of may 2009

STAGE 4:
Presenting and Convincing (5-7 minutes)

Examiner 1 Examiner 2 Candidate 1 Candidate 2

Step 1 • Gives detailed • Sits in back of • Collaborates with • Collaborates with
instructions for stage 4 testing room other candidate to other candidate to
• States purpose of prepare convincing prepare convincing
stage presentation presentation
• Allows candidates • Decides with other • Decides with other
to look at each other’s candidate which two candidate which
sheets arguments s/he will two arguments
• Leaves the table present s/he will present
• Monitors the time • Thinks of more • Thinks of more
[preparation of formal, novel formal, novel
presentation (2-3 min) language appropriate language
is not assessed] to task appropriate to task

Step 2 • Returns to table and • Tells candidates • Presents option • Continues

introduces examiner 2 that s/he is chosen* and explains presentation and
(a person of high status ready to listen two reasons for explains two other
e.g. The Head of the to presentations decision reasons for
Inter-High School Award • Monitors • Uses more formal, decision
Screening Committee) candidates novel language • Uses more formal,
• Leaves the table • Monitors the novel language
• Monitors candidates time * Candidates decide
between themselves who
will begin presentation

6 New ecpe speaking test

 new speaking test effective as of may 2009

Stage 5:
Justifying and Defending (5-7 minutes)

Examiner 1 Examiner 2 Candidate1 Candidate 2

Step 1 • Monitors • Questions each candidate • Justifies/defends • Justifies/
candidates about the reasons s/he decision defends decision
provided, focusing on possible
negative aspects
• Monitors candidates
• Monitors the time
Step 2 • Thanks candidates for
presentation

New ecpe speaking test 7

 new speaking test effective as of may 2009

SAMPLE SPEAKING TASK

(Given to examinees in stage two of the test)

Examiner 1 tells the examinees that they are members of their town’s Inter-High School
Award Screening Committee. The local high schools are introducing an Outstanding
Student Achievement Award. The candidates have been narrowed down to four. Each
committee member is given an information sheet with descriptions of two of the candidates.
They must decide together which graduating student is best qualified to receive the award.

candidate 1 Information Sheet

Outstanding Student Achievement Award

Deborah Shadd
The following list provides information about Ms. Shadd’s achievements and comments
made by her teachers and classmates.

• Highest grades throughout high school

• National math competition winner
• Voted most likely to succeed by classmates
• Student representative on Educational Policy Committee
• Ambitious and competitive
• Hates to lose

Kevin Flynn
The following list provides information about Mr. Flynn’s achievements and comments made
by his teachers and classmates.

• From C to straight-A student

• Part time job on weekends
• Very artistic and musically inclined
• Introduced idea of Inter-school music competition
• Not interested in sports
• Distant and arrogant at times

8 New ecpe speaking test

 new speaking test effective as of may 2009

candidate 2 Information Sheet

Outstanding Student Achievement Award

Mary Anne Gustafson

The following list provides information about Ms. Gustafson’s achievements and comments
made by her teachers and classmates.

• In top 10% of her class

• Class president for two years
• Volunteer project coordinator
• Mayor’s award for volunteer service
• Submitted ideas for school recycling program
• Loses temper easily

Thomas O’Connor
The following list provides information about Mr. O’Connor’s achievements and comments
made by his teachers and classmates.

• Scholar-athlete award twice

• Star tennis player
• Sports editor of school newspaper
• Second prize in sports-related photography competition
• Popular among students
• Excessively self-confident

New ecpe speaking test 9

 ECPE 2009 sPEaking sCoring rubriC (CondEnsEd VErsion)

Discourse and Interaction Linguistic Resources (Range and Accuracy) Delivery And
(Development, Functional Range, and Listening Vocabulary Grammar Intelligibility
Comprehension)

a Production of Independent, Spontaneous Speech • Uses broad range of vocabulary • Uses a wide variety of basic • Fluent and articulate
• Summarizes concisely and accurately; little to no reliance on • Collocations, colloquial and complex grammatical delivery
written material language, idiomatic expressions structures accurately and • Often uses rate of
• Provides coherent explanations without prompting on all topics used accurately and effectively speech and/or prosodic
• Presents decisions persuasively and appropriately for varying appropriately • Uses a range of features to add meaning,
contexts grammatical structures aid listener, and/or
LEVEL EXPErT

Contribution to Extended Interaction that are pragmatically to shift style/register

• Contributes consistently and appropriately to development of appropriate appropriately
interaction; very aware of listener
• Recommendations are appropriate and supported with
explanations
• Justifies position, regularly paraphrasing and elaborating to
explain and/or clarify
• Communication breakdowns are rare
• “Slips of the tongue” may occur, often self-corrected; (fossilized)
Listening Comprehension
errors may be present throughout discourse but do not impede
• Understands linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic
interaction
information in order to engage in extended, spontaneous
interaction

b Production of Independent, Spontaneous Speech • Usually uses a broad range of • Usually uses a variety • Frequently fluent and
• Summarizes concisely and accurately; some reliance on written vocabulary of basic and complex articulate; may require
material • Collocations, colloquial grammatical structures minimal listener effort
• Provides coherent explanations, usually without prompting, on language, and idiomatic accurately and usually • Usually uses rate of
all concrete and most abstract topics expressions are often used effectively speech and/or prosodic
LEVEL ConsisTEnT

• Usually presents decisions persuasively, and usually and are usually accurate and • Usually uses grammatical features to add meaning,
appropriately for context appropriate structures that are to aid listener, and/or
Contribution to Extended Interaction • Occasionally uses secondary pragmatically appropriate to shift style/register
• Usually contributes and appropriately to the development of the meaning of words appropriately
interaction; very aware of listener • Fluency may slightly
• Provides recommendations that are almost always supported decline with challenging
with explanations and are appropriate to the context speech events but this
• Justifies position, frequently paraphrasing and elaborating to rarely affects the flow of
explain and/or clarify statements discourse
• Communication breakdowns usually do not occur • Errors in vocabulary and/or grammar do not cause
Listening Comprehension miscommunication or interrupt the flow of discourse
• Almost always understands linguistic, sociolinguistic, and • Accuracy in vocabulary and/or grammar may decline with more
pragmatic information order to engage in extended, spontaneous challenging speech events
interaction

C Production of Independent, Spontaneous Speech • Often uses moderate range • Often uses a variety of basic • Often fluent, usually
• Adequately summarizes; may rely on written material of vocabulary accurately and and complex grammatical articulate; may require
periodically appropriately structures accurately and some listener effort
• Elaborates, often without prompting, and provide coherent • Occasionally uses idiomatic effectively • Pace usually consistent;
explanations on almost all concrete and many abstract topics expressions and colloquial • Often uses a variety of may occasionally be
• Often presents decisions clearly, appropriately; may occasionally language grammatical structures relatively slow
show some limitations in ability to extend discourse and to • Occasionally uses incorrect that are pragmatically • Occasionally uses rate of
provide convincing explanations collocations that may lead to appropriate speech, and/or prosodic
LEVEL EFFECTiVE

Contribution to Extended Interaction vagueness features to add meaning,

• Often contributes and appropriately to development of aid listener, and/or
• Range of vocabulary and grammatical structures extends beyond
interaction; aware of listener; may occasionally rely on to shift style/register
what has been provided orally and/or in writing
interlocutors for continuation of discussion appropriately
• Gaps and/or errors in vocabulary and/or grammar, sometimes
• Recommendations may require minor prompting for • An increase in rate of
self-corrected, frequently do not hinder communication, but may
supporting explanations; may occasionally be awkwardness to delivery may occasionally
rarely cause interruptions in communication flow
appropriateness of word choices/phrasing lead to a decrease in
• Accuracy in vocabulary and/or grammar often declines with an
• Justifies position adequately; usually able to paraphrase; clarity of speech or
increase in rate of speech and/or with more challenging speech
clarity of meaning may occasionally be lacking when providing comprehensibility
events
supporting details • Fluency may decline
• Communication breakdowns may occur during challenging with more challenging
speech events; usually repaired speech events but this
Listening Comprehension does not stop the flow of
• Usually understands linguistic and sociolinguistic information discourse
and often understands the pragmatic information in order to
engage in extended, spontaneous interaction

10 New ecpe speaking test

 Discourse and Interaction Linguistic Resources (Range and Accuracy) Delivery And
(Development, Functional Range, and Listening Intelligibility
Comprehension) Vocabulary Grammar

d Production of Independent, Spontaneous Speech • Limited range of vocabulary • Frequent use of basic • Listener effort
• Usually summarizes by repeating language already provided • Frequently uses vague and/or structures (i.e., lack of frequently required
• Occasionally able, when prompted, to elaborate and provide inaccurate vocabulary complex sentences) that • Delivery is often slow
explanations on most concrete topics; explanations frequently often contain errors and halting
lack coherence and organization • Pausing and phrasing
LEVEL dEPEndEnT

• Usually presents decisions by repeating language already are often incorrect,

produced negatively affecting
Contribution to Extended Interaction intelligibility
• Frequently relies on other participants to initiate, develop, • Production may be word
maintain discourse; rarely offers feedback or commentary by word, resulting in a
• Usually able to recommend; occasionally able, when prompted, lack of sentence rhythm
to provide supporting explanations and flat intonation
• Attempts to justify a position are usually unclear and repetitive • L1 influence may
• Communication breakdowns may occur during any speech disrupt intelligibility
event and often are not repaired • Vocabulary and grammar structures used are typically repetitions
Listening Comprehension of what has been provided orally or in writing
• Limitations in comprehension may often result in interruptions in • Gaps and/or errors in vocabulary and grammar may disrupt
exchange and in communication breakdowns effective communication

E Production of Independent, Spontaneous Speech • Very limited vocabulary • Uses only basic structures that • Slow and halting
• Unable to summarize; merely reads information provided • Regularly searches for words regularly contain errors delivery
• Occasionally able, when prompted, to elaborate on concrete and • Frequently uses vague • Production is often word
familiar topics; explanations usually lack organization expressions by word, resulting in a
• Usually able to present basic position on concrete topic; very lack of sentence rhythm
little elaboration; usually repeats language already produced and flat intonation
Contribution to Extended Interaction • Errors in rhythm, stress,
• Frequently unable to contribute to the development of discourse and intonation disrupt
LEVEL LiMiTEd

on topics that have been provided; considerable reliance on intelligibility, often

interlocutors causing considerable
• Usually able to state a recommendation or opinion but unable to listener effort
provide supporting explanation • L1 influence may
• Rarely able to justify and defend; attempts are almost always disrupt intelligibility
unclear and repetitive
• Regular gaps and/or errors in vocabulary, grammar, and/or delivery
• Almost always unable to repair communication breakdowns
• Gaps and/or errors frequently prevent communication
Listening Comprehension
• Extreme limitations in comprehension result in an inability to
engage in extended discourse

http://www.lsa.umich.edu/eli

New ecpe speaking test 11

© Copyright Hellenic American Union 2009