Paper 3 : Application Paper on LOA Time 6 : 45 – 7 : 30 ( 45 min ) Speaker ( s )

Influenced by research designed to examine the effects of formative assessment on academic content learning (e.g., math) in mainstream classrooms (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Sadler, 1989; Wiliam, 2011), many second and foreign language assessment (L2) researchers (e.g., Genesee & Upshur, 1996; Leung, 2004; McNamara, 2001; Purpura, 2004; Rea-Dickens, 2008; Shohamy, 1998; Turner, 2012) have highlighted the central role that assessment plays in L2 classrooms and have expressed the need to relate assessment principles and practices to teaching and learning in L2 instructional contexts. This interest has generated considerable research relating to: (1) teacher processes in L2 assessment (Colby-Kelly & Turner, 2007; Davison, 2004; Leung & Teasdale, 1997; Rea-Dickins, 2001); (2) specific assessment methods employed by teachers (Brown & Hudson, 1998; Cheng, Rogers, & Hu, 2004); (3) teacher assessment decision-making processes (Brindley, 1998; Chalhoub-Deville, 1997; Turner & Upshur, 2002); (4) the role of teacher knowledge, experience, and beliefs in using assessments (Rea-Dickins, 2004; Yin, 2010); (5) the role of diagnostic or dynamic assessment in promoting teaching and learning (Alderson, 2005; Alderson et al., 2015; Lantoff & Poehner, 2011); (6) the value of self and peer assessment for self-regulation, autonomy, motivation, and learning (Oscarson, 1997; Patri, 2002; Saito, 2008); (7) the role of technology in learning and assessment (Chapelle & Douglas, 2006; Sawaki, 2012), and (8) the effects of standardsand outcomesbased assessment on teaching, learning and policy (Davidson, 2007; McNamara & Roever, 2006; Leung & Rea-Dickins, 2007). These studies highlight the importance of classroom-based assessment as an emerging paradigm within the field of L2 assessment, and underscore the potential that assessments have for advancing learning processes and learning success. These studies have also spawned an approach to assessment, where learners and learning processes (not necessarily only teaching and teaching processes) are viewed as central when considering the interrelationships across instruction, assessment, and learning. This approach has been referred to as learning-oriented assessment (LOA) (Purpura, 2004, 2009; Turner & Purpura, 2015; Purpura & Turner, forthcoming), and is not to be confused with nor in competition with other approaches such as diagnostic or dynamic assessment (Alderson et al. 2015; Lantolf & Poehner, 2011), even though these approaches share certain characteristics and concerns. These studies have also provided important insights, with findings suggesting that critical factors in the use of assessments to create and support an environment for learning involve: the contextual characteristics of instructional spaces, learner performance levels with respect to instructional targets, evaluation processes and their implementation, the socio-cognitive characteristics of teachers and learners, interactional patterns associated with assessments embedded in instruction, and other factors. What remains unclear is how these dimensions interact within a theory of LOA, and how they might promote a coherent set of localized best practices. Aiming to understand the factors involved in L2 assessment from a learning orientation, the current paper provides a description of the dimensions of LOA, and a tool to help analyze and talk about the role of classroom assessment from a learning-oriented perspective. These dimensions are illustrated through data from a classroom in which ELLs are learning the passive voice as a resource for discussing topical processes like desalination. Paper 2: Theoretical Paper on LOA in Applied Linguistics Time 6:00 – 6:45 (45min) Speaker(s) Constant Leung King’s College, London Title Learning from Feedback: Conception, Reception and Consequences Abstract Current formative assessment literature foregrounds the significant role played by teacher feedback in student learning. Formulating feedback, however, is conceptually complex in that it has to be pitched appropriately in terms of domains and levels of knowledge and ways of knowing/learning from the student’s point of view. Perrenoud (1998) and others have pointed out the importance of recognising situated regimes of teaching, assessment and learning. This talk will be based on a case study of the design, interpretation and use of formative feedback from the standpoints of tutors and students on an MA TESOL programme. The programme team involved is strongly in favour of using assessment as an opportunity to improve learning, and has been trying to develop a set of learning-oriented assessment strategies as part of a continuing effort to improve pedagogic practice. There is a collective desire on the part of the teaching staff to better understand how students, many of whom are from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, understand and respond to their attempts to promote learning though assessment. Drawing on the work in dialogic teaching (Alexander, 2008), formative assessment (Black and Wiliam, 2009), phenomenography (Marton, 1986), and social participation and classroom learning (Leung 2010, 2014), I will examine feedback as an intersection of academic values, disciplinary dispositions, individual perceptions and actions, and curricular processes. The data will comprise student written assignments, tutor written feedback comments, and interviews with tutors and students. The overall aim is to map individual actions and pedagogic activities onto a coherent conceptual frame for assessment and learning that takes account of participant and contextual variations.Current formative assessment literature foregrounds the significant role played by teacher feedback in student learning. Formulating feedback, however, is conceptually complex in that it has to be pitched appropriately in terms of domains and levels of knowledge and ways of knowing/learning from the student’s point of view. Perrenoud (1998) and others have pointed out the importance of recognising situated regimes of teaching, assessment and learning. This talk will be based on a case study of the design, interpretation and use of formative feedback from the standpoints of tutors and students on an MA TESOL programme. The programme team involved is strongly in favour of using assessment as an opportunity to improve learning, and has been trying to develop a set of learning-oriented assessment strategies as part of a continuing effort to improve pedagogic practice. There is a collective desire on the part of the teaching staff to better understand how students, many of whom are from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, understand and respond to their attempts to promote learning though assessment. Drawing on the work in dialogic teaching (Alexander, 2008), formative assessment (Black and Wiliam, 2009), phenomenography (Marton, 1986), and social participation and classroom learning (Leung 2010, 2014), I will examine feedback as an intersection of academic values, disciplinary dispositions, individual perceptions and actions, and curricular processes. The data will comprise student written assignments, tutor written feedback comments, and interviews with tutors and students. The overall aim is to map individual actions and pedagogic activities onto a coherent conceptual frame for assessment and learning that takes account of participant and contextual variations. Paper 3: Application Paper on LOA Time 6:45 – 7:30 (45min) Speaker(s) Tenaha O’Reilly & John Sabatini Educational Testing Service Title Using Cognitive Theory and Technology to Improve Reading Assessment Abstract Recent large scale initiatives and policy reports have called for a new generation of assessments that are better aligned with theory, research and their practical use in educational settings (Gordon Commission, 2013). Building upon this theme, we present an overview of the research and development from a federally funded project called the Reading for Understanding (RfU), an initiative that is designed to improve reading comprehension through intervention and assessment (IES, 2010). The presentation will focus on the assessment strand of the initiative that is charged with building innovative reading comprehension assessments for students in second through twelfth grade. The assessments are based on a cognitive framework that synthesized the research in the learning sciences, reading, and strategies literatures. Two types of complementary assessments are used to measure reading ability: component assessments and scenario-based assessments (SBA). The component assessments are designed to measure foundational reading skills including word recognition, decoding, vocabulary, morphology, sentence processing, reading efficiency and basic reading comprehension. The component skills are used to help interpret performance on the SBA. The SBA provides a realistic purpose and context for reading a collection of thematically-related source materials. Tasks and activities are sequenced to both build up students understanding of the content and help identify areas that might be problematic for some students. Reading strategies and simulated peer students are included in the design to help model desired performances. Performance moderators such as background knowledge, motivation and engagement are also included in some assessments to help improve the interpretation of test scores. This presentation will provide an overview of the reading framework, the two types of assessments and how they may be useful for education and instruction.Recent large scale initiatives and policy reports have called for a new generation of assessments that are better aligned with theory, research and their practical use in educational settings (Gordon Commission, 2013). Building upon this theme, we present an overview of the research and development from a federally funded project called the Reading for Understanding (RfU), an initiative that is designed to improve reading comprehension through intervention and assessment (IES, 2010). The presentation will focus on the assessment strand of the initiative that is charged with building innovative reading comprehension assessments for students in second through twelfth grade. The assessments are based on a cognitive framework that synthesized the research in the learning sciences, reading, and strategies literatures. Two types of complementary assessments are used to measure reading ability: component assessments and scenario-based assessments (SBA). The component assessments are designed to measure foundational reading skills including word recognition, decoding, vocabulary, morphology, sentence processing, reading efficiency and basic reading comprehension. The component skills are used to help interpret performance on the SBA. The SBA provides a realistic purpose and context for reading a collection of thematically-related source materials. Tasks and activities are sequenced to both build up students understanding of the content and help identify areas that might be problematic for some students. Reading strategies and simulated peer students are included in the design to help model desired performances. Performance moderators such as background knowledge, motivation and engagement are also included in some assessments to help improve the interpretation of test scores. This presentation will provide an overview of the reading framework, the two types of assessments and how they may be useful for education and instruction. Day 2 – Saturday, October 11 Paper 4: Theoretical Paper on LOA in Mainstream Education Time 09:00 – 9:45 (45) Speaker(s) James W. Pellegrino & Susan R. Goldman University of Illinois, Chicago Title Reading for Understanding: A Principled Approach to the Integration of Assessment and Instruction for Reading in the Disciplines Abstract In this presentation we will focus on the challenges of designing assessments of reading for understanding where the latter is defined as the capacity to engage in evidence-based argumentation drawing on multiple text sources. By evidence-based argumentation we mean making a claim or assertion that is supported by evidence that connects to the claim in a principled way. Such a definition of reading for understanding must make three critical components clear to teachers and students. First, it must detail what counts as reading for understanding in a specific discipline. Second, it must convey both the performances and work products that demonstrate the desired outcome. Third, it must capture the kinds of instruction that can engage students in critical literacy processes in a specific content area. Project READI (Reading, Evidence and Argumentation in Disciplinary Instruction) has been engaged in a principled process of developing a domain analysis and domain models of reading for understanding in the disciplinary areas of literature, history and science for grades 6-12. In this presentation we will describe the results of that process, including examples of assessments developed to support processes of instruction and learning. We will discuss how an evidence-centered design process was used to create a common framework across the three disciplines as well as specific disciplinary instantiations of that framework for purposes of designing instructional interventions and for assessing their efficacy. The assessment framework can function to support both summative and formative assessment functions at the level of the classroom. We will also consider how the challenges of reading for understanding interact with student background knowledge and general reading skills, especially as these issues relate to English language learners and the implications for instruction and assessment.In this presentation we will focus on the challenges of designing assessments of reading for understanding where the latter is defined as the capacity to engage in evidence-based argumentation drawing on multiple text sources. By evidence-based argumentation we mean making a claim or assertion that is supported by evidence that connects to the claim in a principled way. Such a definition of reading for understanding must make three critical components clear to teachers and students. First, it must detail what counts as reading for understanding in a specific discipline. Second, it must convey both the performances and work products that demonstrate the desired outcome. Third, it must capture the kinds of instruction that can engage students in critical literacy processes in a specific content area. Project READI (Reading, Evidence and Argumentation in Disciplinary Instruction) has been engaged in a principled process of developing a domain analysis and domain models of reading for understanding in the disciplinary areas of literature, history and science for grades 6-12. In this presentation we will describe the results of that process, including examples of assessments developed to support processes of instruction and learning. We will discuss how an evidence-centered design process was used to create a common framework across the three disciplines as well as specific disciplinary instantiations of that framework for purposes of designing instructional interventions and for assessing their efficacy. The assessment framework can function to support both summative and formative assessment functions at the level of the classroom. We will also consider how the challenges of reading for understanding interact with student background knowledge and general reading skills, especially as these issues relate to English language learners and the implications for instruction and assessment. Paper 5: Empirical Paper of LOA Time 9:45 – 10:15 (30) Speaker(s) Margaret Heritage & Alison Bailey University of California, Los Angeles Title The Role of Language Learning Progressions in Formative Assessment for English Learners Abstract Recently created English language development (ELD) standards (e.g., CCSSO, 2012) take account of newly adopted college and career ready standards and primarily focus on the language used in specific subject areas, for example, mathematics and science. While ELD standards can serve as general guidelines for teachers of ELL students’ language growth in content area learning, they do not provide the level of detail related to linguistic content needed for day-to-day instruction and, in particular, for formative assessment. Learning progressions of language development, which are analogous to progressions gaining momentum in mathematics and science (e.g., Corcoran, Mosher, & Rogat, 2009), can provide greater specificity about language growth by tracing its development from rudimentary stages through increasingly sophisticated forms. This presentation reports on an ongoing project, Dynamic Language Learning Progressions (DLLP) that aims to provide teachers with empirically derived language progressions for the purpose of instruction and formative assessment. We view formative assessment as a dynamic, interactive process involving ongoing assessment of how learning is evolving, and subsequent adjustments to teaching and learning to meet students’ immediate learning needs. The DLLP project began by focusing on the development of a progression for explanation, a core language function that cuts across domains. To create the progression, we collected an average of six oral and two written explanations in response to a battery of prompts provided by researchers for a personal routine (teeth-cleaning) and an academic task (mathematics) from 325 students enrolled in grades K, 1, 3, and 5 at two time points, fall and spring of the same year. The students were deliberately selected to provide diversity, including ethnicity, family income, L1 literacy and ELL status. A subsample of 100 students was sampled at two further time points after they had entered the next grade. Approximately 1,500 of 4,300 audio-recorded, oral language samples in the corpus have been analyzed to date, through a process of researcher analysis and through a database developed for the project. Cluster analysis is planned on the features generated by the database and on the researcher-coded features. While we recognize that he DLLP language features are still subject to further validity research, we have identified eight high-leverage language features to provide the core of the progression. As part of the development of the DLLP for oral explanation, and to try it out as an interpretive framework for formative assessment, we have engaged, for the past nine months, in a case study with a group of experienced elementary teachers. We were interested to find out if the course of acquisition of the language features in the progression made sense to them, and if they were able to use the DLLP to interpret their observations of students’ explanations in academic contexts. Our findings from the case study suggest that the teachers’ use of the DLLP has both increased their knowledge of language development and better positioned them to engage in effective formative assessment and support language learning in the content areas.Recently created English language development (ELD) standards (e.g., CCSSO, 2012) take account of newly adopted college and career ready standards and primarily focus on the language used in specific subject areas, for example, mathematics and science. While ELD standards can serve as general guidelines for teachers of ELL students’ language growth in content area learning, they do not provide the level of detail related to linguistic content needed for day-to-day instruction and, in particular, for formative assessment. Learning progressions of language development, which are analogous to progressions gaining momentum in mathematics and science (e.g., Corcoran, Mosher, & Rogat, 2009), can provide greater specificity about language growth by tracing its development from rudimentary stages through increasingly sophisticated forms. This presentation reports on an ongoing project, Dynamic Language Learning Progressions (DLLP) that aims to provide teachers with empirically derived language progressions for the purpose of instruction and formative assessment. We view formative assessment as a dynamic, interactive process involving ongoing assessment of how learning is evolving, and subsequent adjustments to teaching and learning to meet students’ immediate learning needs. The DLLP project began by focusing on the development of a progression for explanation, a core language function that cuts across domains. To create the progression, we collected an average of six oral and two written explanations in response to a battery of prompts provided by researchers for a personal routine (teeth-cleaning) and an academic task (mathematics) from 325 students enrolled in grades K, 1, 3, and 5 at two time points, fall and spring of the same year. The students were deliberately selected to provide diversity, including ethnicity, family income, L1 literacy and ELL status. A subsample of 100 students was sampled at two further time points after they had entered the next grade. Approximately 1,500 of 4,300 audio-recorded, oral language samples in the corpus have been analyzed to date, through a process of researcher analysis and through a database developed for the project. Cluster analysis is planned on the features generated by the database and on the researcher-coded features. While we recognize that he DLLP language features are still subject to further validity research, we have identified eight high-leverage language features to provide the core of the progression. As part of the development of the DLLP for oral explanation, and to try it out as an interpretive framework for formative assessment, we have engaged, for the past nine months, in a case study with a group of experienced elementary teachers. We were interested to find out if the course of acquisition of the language features in the progression made sense to them, and if they were able to use the DLLP to interpret their observations of students’ explanations in academic contexts. Our findings from the case study suggest that the teachers’ use of the DLLP has both increased their knowledge of language development and better positioned them to engage in effective formative assessment and support language learning in the content areas. Paper 6: Application Paper on LOA Time 10:15 – 11:00 (45) Speaker(s) Mikyung Wolf & Alexis Lopez Educational Testing Service Title The Use of Scaffolding Strategies in the Assessment of English Learners Abstract In K-12 public schools in the United States, there are a growing number of English learners (ELs) who are in need of developing appropriate English language proficiency to meaningfully participate in school settings. To appropriately serve these students, an accurate measure of their English language proficiency (ELP) is essential to identify areas for improvement and determine suitable instructional support. While the current policy in K-12 education has required schools to implement an annual, summative assessment of ELP to measure ELs’ attainment of English language development, these accountability assessments have been criticized for the lack of detailed information to help teachers offer more targeted instruction for ELs. In addressing the need for an improved ELP measure, the present study focused on devising innovative ELP assessment tasks particularly using scaffolding strategies. In instructional settings, scaffolding is widely used to guide students to complete given tasks and improve student learning. In assessment settings, many ELs are often unable to complete tasks due to language barriers, resulting in insufficient data to make accurate inferences about students’ language proficiency. By adopting scaffolding strategies into assessment, we explored ways to increase students’ production of language use abilities and, in turn, to make more informed inferences about students’ areas of development at finer-grained levels. In this study, we developed various scenario-based assessment tasks on tablet computers. Each scenario included a storyline with ample visual images to provide authentic school-based situations and increase student engagement. For example, one scenario depicted a typical school day, including classroom announcements, a reading activity, lunch time, and an art class. Assessment tasks were embedded throughout the scenario to measure both discrete and integrated language skills. A few speaking tasks were designed to also include scaffolding questions to examine the extent to which students were able to complete the task using various degrees of scaffolding support. In these tasks, students were first asked to retell a story independently, and then answer a series of scaffolding questions. The students were then given a second opportunity to retell the story. The study design was mainly qualitative with a focus on analyzing students’ verbal responses. A total of 140 students in Grades K-5 participated in the study. Researchers conducted one-on-one interviews following observation and interview protocols. Student responses were scored using both holistic and analytic rating scales. Descriptive statistics were computed for each task. Interview transcripts and students’ responses were also closely analyzed. The results indicated that students tended to perform equally or better on the second retell task compared to the first retell, particularly in Grades K-2. Students were seemingly able to retell the story more effectively after answering a set of scaffolding questions. Even students with low performance on the retell task tended to complete the scaffolding questions. These results suggest that the incorporation of scaffolding into assessment has the potential to improve the measurement of EL students’ language proficiency and also provide useful information for teachers’ instruction. Further, assessment design with scaffolding offers a promising means of engaging students in learning during assessment.In K-12 public schools in the United States, there are a growing number of English learners (ELs) who are in need of developing appropriate English language proficiency to meaningfully participate in school settings. To appropriately serve these students, an accurate measure of their English language proficiency (ELP) is essential to identify areas for improvement and determine suitable instructional support. While the current policy in K-12 education has required schools to implement an annual, summative assessment of ELP to measure ELs’ attainment of English language development, these accountability assessments have been criticized for the lack of detailed information to help teachers offer more targeted instruction for ELs. In addressing the need for an improved ELP measure, the present study focused on devising innovative ELP assessment tasks particularly using scaffolding strategies. In instructional settings, scaffolding is widely used to guide students to complete given tasks and improve student learning. In assessment settings, many ELs are often unable to complete tasks due to language barriers, resulting in insufficient data to make accurate inferences about students’ language proficiency. By adopting scaffolding strategies into assessment, we explored ways to increase students’ production of language use abilities and, in turn, to make more informed inferences about students’ areas of development at finer-grained levels. In this study, we developed various scenario-based assessment tasks on tablet computers. Each scenario included a storyline with ample visual images to provide authentic school-based situations and increase student engagement. For example, one scenario depicted a typical school day, including classroom announcements, a reading activity, lunch time, and an art class. Assessment tasks were embedded throughout the scenario to measure both discrete and integrated language skills. A few speaking tasks were designed to also include scaffolding questions to examine the extent to which students were able to complete the task using various degrees of scaffolding support. In these tasks, students were first asked to retell a story independently, and then answer a series of scaffolding questions. The students were then given a second opportunity to retell the story. The study design was mainly qualitative with a focus on analyzing students’ verbal responses. A total of 140 students in Grades K-5 participated in the study. Researchers conducted one-on-one interviews following observation and interview protocols. Student responses were scored using both holistic and analytic rating scales. Descriptive statistics were computed for each task. Interview transcripts and students’ responses were also closely analyzed. The results indicated that students tended to perform equally or better on the second retell task compared to the first retell, particularly in Grades K-2. Students were seemingly able to retell the story more effectively after answering a set of scaffolding questions. Even students with low performance on the retell task tended to complete the scaffolding questions. These results suggest that the incorporation of scaffolding into assessment has the potential to improve the measurement of EL students’ language proficiency and also provide useful information for teachers’ instruction. Further, assessment design with scaffolding offers a promising means of engaging students in learning during assessment. Paper 7: Theoretical Paper on LOA in Applied Linguistics Time 11:20 – 12:05 (45) Speaker(s) Matthew E. Poehner Pennsylvania State University Title Dynamic Assessment and Mediated Learning: Toward a Coherent Theoretical Framework for Developmental L2 Education Abstract In the L2 field, as in education more generally, the widespread use of standardized tests to inform highstakes decisions and concerns with the quality of educational outcomes have, in recent years, led growing numbers of researchers, policy makers, and classroom teachers to search for ways of more closely aligning assessment practices with instructional activities. Terms such as assessment for learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998), learning-oriented assessment (Turner & Purpura, forthcoming), and interactive assessment (HampLyons & Tavares, 2011) compel new ways of understanding how assessment may be leveraged to support student learning, and have been pursued alongside newly invigorated research programs concerned with notions of formative assessment (Leung 2004), classroom assessment (Rea-Dickins 2008), teacher-based assessment (Davison, 2004) and diagnostic assessment (Alderson 2006). Against this backdrop, L2 Dynamic Assessment (DA) has emerged as a dialectical framework for understanding and promoting learner development (Poehner, 2008). What distinguishes DA from the aforementioned perspectives is its commitment to a particular psychological theory of thinking and learning, namely, Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. This paper examines DA and its contributions to our understanding of how assessment may be integrated with teaching in order to intervene in and guide processes of learner L2 development. The paper first overviews the origins of DA in Vygotsky’s (1987) writings, with particular attention to the concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Following Lantolf and Poehner (2014), the ZPD is conceived as an essential feature of developmental education, that is, education that aims not merely to impart knowledge to learners but to lead to new ways of understanding and acting in the world. The ZPD references activity undertaken in cooperation with learners wherein task demands exceed learners’ current capabilities and success requires cooperation with a mediator. DA is an especially powerful form of ZPD activity that foregrounds the quality of mediator-learner dialogic interaction, with mediators intervening when learners experience difficulties, probing the underlying sources of poor performance, and noting learner responsiveness during interaction. DA has long been pursued in cognitive psychology and special education as a principled approach to diagnosing learner development according to the degree of explicitness required from mediators to provoke successful responses from learners (Haywood & Lidz, 2007). In the L2 field, DA has been framed as an integration of assessment and teaching as the extent of mediator involvement indicates learner proximity to independent functioning while the use of prompts, leading questions, models, and feedback to learners represents instruction tailored to their emerging abilities. The instructional potential of such cooperative interaction has been systematically elaborated through Reuven Feuerstein’s proposal of Mediated Learning (Feuerstein et al., 2003). Mediated Learning offers in-depth psychological analysis of successful independent, or self-regulated, functioning and points toward the various dimensions of such functioning that may become a focus of mediator intervention. In this paper, instances of L2 mediator-learner interactions are analyzed in relation to DA and Mediated Learning. It is argued that, together, these concepts provide a coherent, theoretically motivated framework that may orient practitioners to assessment and teaching as developmental activities.In the L2 field, as in education more generally, the widespread use of standardized tests to inform highstakes decisions and concerns with the quality of educational outcomes have, in recent years, led growing numbers of researchers, policy makers, and classroom teachers to search for ways of more closely aligning assessment practices with instructional activities. Terms such as assessment for learning (Black & Wiliam, 1998), learning-oriented assessment (Turner & Purpura, forthcoming), and interactive assessment (HampLyons & Tavares, 2011) compel new ways of understanding how assessment may be leveraged to support student learning, and have been pursued alongside newly invigorated research programs concerned with notions of formative assessment (Leung 2004), classroom assessment (Rea-Dickins 2008), teacher-based assessment (Davison, 2004) and diagnostic assessment (Alderson 2006). Against this backdrop, L2 Dynamic Assessment (DA) has emerged as a dialectical framework for understanding and promoting learner development (Poehner, 2008). What distinguishes DA from the aforementioned perspectives is its commitment to a particular psychological theory of thinking and learning, namely, Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. This paper examines DA and its contributions to our understanding of how assessment may be integrated with teaching in order to intervene in and guide processes of learner L2 development. The paper first overviews the origins of DA in Vygotsky’s (1987) writings, with particular attention to the concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Following Lantolf and Poehner (2014), the ZPD is conceived as an essential feature of developmental education, that is, education that aims not merely to impart knowledge to learners but to lead to new ways of understanding and acting in the world. The ZPD references activity undertaken in cooperation with learners wherein task demands exceed learners’ current capabilities and success requires cooperation with a mediator. DA is an especially powerful form of ZPD activity that foregrounds the quality of mediator-learner dialogic interaction, with mediators intervening when learners experience difficulties, probing the underlying sources of poor performance, and noting learner responsiveness during interaction. DA has long been pursued in cognitive psychology and special education as a principled approach to diagnosing learner development according to the degree of explicitness required from mediators to provoke successful responses from learners (Haywood & Lidz, 2007). In the L2 field, DA has been framed as an integration of assessment and teaching as the extent of mediator involvement indicates learner proximity to independent functioning while the use of prompts, leading questions, models, and feedback to learners represents instruction tailored to their emerging abilities. The instructional potential of such cooperative interaction has been systematically elaborated through Reuven Feuerstein’s proposal of Mediated Learning (Feuerstein et al., 2003). Mediated Learning offers in-depth psychological analysis of successful independent, or self-regulated, functioning and points toward the various dimensions of such functioning that may become a focus of mediator intervention. In this paper, instances of L2 mediator-learner interactions are analyzed in relation to DA and Mediated Learning. It is argued that, together, these concepts provide a coherent, theoretically motivated framework that may orient practitioners to assessment and teaching as developmental activities. Paper 8: Empirical Paper of LOA Time 12:05 – 12:35 (30) Speaker(s) Kathryn Hill La Trobe University, AU Title A Framework for Promoting Teacher Awareness of their CBA Practices and Learning-oriented Assessment Abstract Rationale While the central focus in LOA is on learners, learning processes and learning outcomes (Purpura & Turner, forthcoming), teachers have a crucial role to play in creating the conditions for learning. According to Scarino (2013), “[n]ot only do teachers need to understand the conceptual bases of different approaches [to assessment], they also need to relate such knowledge to their professional practice in their particular context” (p. 310). However, teachers don’t necessarily have the skills and training to reflect in any systematic way on their own assessment practices, let alone on the theories of learning, which underpin them or the contextual forces which shape them.Rationale While the central focus in LOA is on learners, learning processes and learning outcomes (Purpura & Turner, forthcoming), teachers have a crucial role to play in creating the conditions for learning. According to Scarino (2013), “[n]ot only do teachers need to understand the conceptual bases of different approaches [to assessment], they also need to relate such knowledge to their professional practice in their particular context” (p. 310). However, teachers don’t necessarily have the skills and training to reflect in any systematic way on their own assessment practices, let alone on the theories of learning, which underpin them or the contextual forces which shape them. Purpose This presentation will consider how a framework originally designed to help researchers understand classroom-based assessment processes has been reframed as a tool to develop teachers’ assessment literacy and promote LOA. The original framework was developed as part of an ethnographic study of foreign language classrooms in two Australian schools (Hill, 2012; Hill & McNamara, 2012). Based on observation of what teachers actually do (e.g., Leung, 2005) the framework adopts a definition of CBA designed to account for the full spectrum of CBA practices, including the more incidental types of assessment which occur as part of everyday classroom interactions (Purpura, 2014). Methodology Revisions to the original framework were informed by a review of taxonomies of teacher assessment practices, definitions of teacher assessment literacy and the literature on good practice in classroom-based assessment more generally. Key findings/ Implications for LOA While not explicitly organized within a LOA framework, the revised tool is nonetheless consistent with the principles of LOA as set out by Purpura and Turner (forthcoming). For example, the tool is designed to facilitate reflection on the nature of the assessments as well as the beliefs and understandings (about the subject, SLA, language teaching and assessment), which underpin them (Assessment Dimension). It also explores the relationship between assessments and the relevant curriculum standards and frameworks and how prior knowledge, ability level, interest level and learning needs are taken into account (Proficiency Dimension). It emphasizes the learner perspective and agency in assessment and highlights the relationship between feedback, motivation and goal orientation (Affective Dimension). Furthermore, by including a specific focus on how practice is shaped by contextual factors at the local (classroom and institutional) level as well as the social and political level, the revised framework acknowledges the inevitable gap between policy and practice as well as the situated nature of CBA (Contextual Dimension). Paper 9: Theoretical Paper on LOA in Mainstream Education Time 2:00 – 2:45 (45) Speaker(s) Howard T. Everson City University of New York Title Developing a Validity Framework for Classroom Language Assessments Abstract This paper will address the issue of how best to evaluate (validate, in test jargon) the instructional utility of classroom-based language assessments. Whether used as interim measures of student achievement, or as formative assessments to improve the teaching and learning of languages, using tests and assessments in the classroom—embedding them in the instructional sequence—requires language teachers provide an argument in support of the validity of tests for such purposes. Assessments for language learning are intended, by design, to transform classroom tests into instructional interventions, i.e., ways of improving student learning. When used in this way, teacher-designed, classroom-based language assessments ought to be closely aligned with instruction, accurately reflect student achievement, and formatively guide and monitor students’ learning over time. Unfortunately, very few teachers have had the opportunity to learn about the principles of sound assessment design, especially when assessments are used to promote learning. Traditional measurement theorists established validity as the central technical criterion for educational tests, defining it as the “degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretation of the test scores entailed by proposed uses of the test (AERA, APA, & NCME, 1999). Unlike large-scale language assessments, most classroom-based language tests are used for a variety of purposes and in varying instructional contexts, often with little regard to quality of the validity evidence supporting those uses and contexts. Classroom-based assessments, if they are to promote teaching and learning, require a more contemporary view of validity, one based in both an interpretive and a validity argument (Kane, 2013). Collecting on-going evidence in support of the validity of classroom assessments places a substantial burden on otherwise over-worked teachers. This paper will outline an argument-based validity framework intended to support the design and use(s) of language assessments with the aim of improving the instructional role of testing in the classroom.This paper will address the issue of how best to evaluate (validate, in test jargon) the instructional utility of classroom-based language assessments. Whether used as interim measures of student achievement, or as formative assessments to improve the teaching and learning of languages, using tests and assessments in the classroom—embedding them in the instructional sequence—requires language teachers provide an argument in support of the validity of tests for such purposes. Assessments for language learning are intended, by design, to transform classroom tests into instructional interventions, i.e., ways of improving student learning. When used in this way, teacher-designed, classroom-based language assessments ought to be closely aligned with instruction, accurately reflect student achievement, and formatively guide and monitor students’ learning over time. Unfortunately, very few teachers have had the opportunity to learn about the principles of sound assessment design, especially when assessments are used to promote learning. Traditional measurement theorists established validity as the central technical criterion for educational tests, defining it as the “degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretation of the test scores entailed by proposed uses of the test (AERA, APA, & NCME, 1999). Unlike large-scale language assessments, most classroom-based language tests are used for a variety of purposes and in varying instructional contexts, often with little regard to quality of the validity evidence supporting those uses and contexts. Classroom-based assessments, if they are to promote teaching and learning, require a more contemporary view of validity, one based in both an interpretive and a validity argument (Kane, 2013). Collecting on-going evidence in support of the validity of classroom assessments places a substantial burden on otherwise over-worked teachers. This paper will outline an argument-based validity framework intended to support the design and use(s) of language assessments with the aim of improving the instructional role of testing in the classroom. Paper 10: Empirical Paper of LOA Time 2:45 – 3:15 (30) Speaker(s) Christian Colby-Kelly Government of Canada Title A Theoretical Analysis Approach to AFL Pedagogical Materials Development in an L2 Classroom Setting Abstract Learning-Oriented Assessment (LOA) applications in second language (L2) classroom settings focus on helping learners notice gaps and advance in their learning, and on helping them be more autonomous. LOA challenges teachers to stimulate their students’ language learning in more engaged and effective ways than former methods have usually done (Davison & Hamp-Lyons, 2010; Fox & Harwick, 2011). In fact, the challenge of finding interesting and useful ways of applying LOA in L2 classrooms remains one of the key challenges L2 teachers may face. While it is encouraging that the field of language testing/assessment has recently evolved to include the new paradigm of LOA, to make this approach a truly viable alternative to traditional L2 assessment, more research into innovation in LOA applications and their effectiveness is needed. With that in mind, the present research will report on the preliminary results of a larger exploratory mixed methods investigation of the interpretation, application, and effectiveness of an Assessment for Learning (AFL) application (an iteration of LOA), in two L2 classes of pre-university students in Quebec, Canada. In particular, it will focus on the process of pedagogical material development, and evidence of the effectiveness of the materials in supporting learning will also be discussed. The study took a Vygotskian socio-cultural theoretical approach, and centered on these students’ learning of a challenging L2 grammatical feature. In preparation for the development of pedagogical materials, the 10 Principles of AFL were categorized within 4 key characteristics, engaging (1) learner autonomy, (2) the way students learn, (3) teacher and learner assessment goal sharing, and (4) learner motivation. Based on the four features, pedagogical materials were developed incorporating constructive feedback, instances of selfand peer-assessments, learner reflections, teacher guided questioning and knowledge scaffolding, and taking into account individual learning styles. The pedagogical materials included computer-assisted language learning (CALL), an online individual concept mapping (CM) exercise, and peer-group and teacher-class concept mapping exercises. The data collection instruments included the concept maps produced, classroom observation field notes, transcribed group and class discourse, teacher and student survey questionnaires, and preand post-treatment tests to indicate trends. The data were analyzed by mixed methods and the results triangulated. The results provided strong evidence in favour of the effectiveness of the application in support of L2 learning. The survey data showed strong teacher and student perceptions that learning had taken place in all of the exercises. Evidence in the form of classroom observations and transcribed audio-recordings supports this. The results also suggest that some learners noticed gaps in their actual and target competency in L2 production tasks. The results of this investigation contribute to a body of evidence showing that an AFL approach may be effective in supporting learning. The present research has illustrated the process of pedagogical materials development in one setting, and as such it may inform on other iterations of LOA in other applications, in other settings where teachers may challenge their learners towards more autonomy in their learning, and promote ways to advance towards greater learning goals.Learning-Oriented Assessment (LOA) applications in second language (L2) classroom settings focus on helping learners notice gaps and advance in their learning, and on helping them be more autonomous. LOA challenges teachers to stimulate their students’ language learning in more engaged and effective ways than former methods have usually done (Davison & Hamp-Lyons, 2010; Fox & Harwick, 2011). In fact, the challenge of finding interesting and useful ways of applying LOA in L2 classrooms remains one of the key challenges L2 teachers may face. While it is encouraging that the field of language testing/assessment has recently evolved to include the new paradigm of LOA, to make this approach a truly viable alternative to traditional L2 assessment, more research into innovation in LOA applications and their effectiveness is needed. With that in mind, the present research will report on the preliminary results of a larger exploratory mixed methods investigation of the interpretation, application, and effectiveness of an Assessment for Learning (AFL) application (an iteration of LOA), in two L2 classes of pre-university students in Quebec, Canada. In particular, it will focus on the process of pedagogical material development, and evidence of the effectiveness of the materials in supporting learning will also be discussed. The study took a Vygotskian socio-cultural theoretical approach, and centered on these students’ learning of a challenging L2 grammatical feature. In preparation for the development of pedagogical materials, the 10 Principles of AFL were categorized within 4 key characteristics, engaging (1) learner autonomy, (2) the way students learn, (3) teacher and learner assessment goal sharing, and (4) learner motivation. Based on the four features, pedagogical materials were developed incorporating constructive feedback, instances of selfand peer-assessments, learner reflections, teacher guided questioning and knowledge scaffolding, and taking into account individual learning styles. The pedagogical materials included computer-assisted language learning (CALL), an online individual concept mapping (CM) exercise, and peer-group and teacher-class concept mapping exercises. The data collection instruments included the concept maps produced, classroom observation field notes, transcribed group and class discourse, teacher and student survey questionnaires, and preand post-treatment tests to indicate trends. The data were analyzed by mixed methods and the results triangulated. The results provided strong evidence in favour of the effectiveness of the application in support of L2 learning. The survey data showed strong teacher and student perceptions that learning had taken place in all of the exercises. Evidence in the form of classroom observations and transcribed audio-recordings supports this. The results also suggest that some learners noticed gaps in their actual and target competency in L2 production tasks. The results of this investigation contribute to a body of evidence showing that an AFL approach may be effective in supporting learning. The present research has illustrated the process of pedagogical materials development in one setting, and as such it may inform on other iterations of LOA in other applications, in other settings where teachers may challenge their learners towards more autonomy in their learning, and promote ways to advance towards greater learning goals. Paper 11: Empirical Paper of LOA Time 3:15 – 3:45 (30) Speaker(s) Ah-Young Kim & Hyun Jung Kim 1. Cornell University 2. Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Title Using an Integrated Reading and Writing Task for Learning-oriented Assessment in an English for Academic Purpose Setting Abstract Learning-oriented assessment (LOA) has gained much attention for its potential to promote learning through assessment by creating a link between the two in various learning and assessment contexts (Assessment Reform Group, 2002; Black & Wiliam, 1998; Purpura & Turner, 2013). A number of previous studies have examined the effectiveness of feedback, an element of LOA, in L2 writing (e.g., Bitchener & Ferris, 2012; Ferris, 2003; Hyland & Hyland, 2006). Yet, few have explored how LOA could be implemented using an integrated reading and writing task, especially for English for academic purposes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of LOA of an L2 integrated reading and writing task for the development of EFL learners’ academic writing ability. This qualitative case study collected multiple sources of data (e.g., writing samples, teacher feedback, interview data) from learners and their instructor for a six-week period. Participants included ten graduate students majoring in TESOL at a Korean university enrolled in a research method course and their professor. Every week, each student completed an integrated reading and writing task as part of their classroom assessment, which required them to first read an academic research paper, and then write a summary and critique on it. On each completed integrated task, the instructor gave formative feedback involving detailed comments on the four areas of content, language, organization, and mechanics. After receiving feedback, students were required to revise their work and resubmit it with their new writing of a subsequent task. In addition, each student participated in a semi-structured interview to share their thoughts on the effectiveness of the formative feedback they received. The analysis focused on (1) the nature of instructor’s formative feedback and (2) improvements/changes in the students’ writing in accordance with the feedback provided. Students’ interview data were also analyzed to account for how the students perceived and used the instructor’s feedback to improve their writing. Findings indicated that the students displayed diverse developmental patterns in the content and organization dimensions. With regards to content, the first group of students continued to improve the content of summary and critique steadily throughout the six-week period. On the other hand, the second group did not provide any evidence of improvement over time. The last group showed rather unstable changes over the six weeks by displaying strengths and weaknesses in content in a random manner and then made progress in the final assessment; for organization, a couple of students showed a steady improvement while most other students’ performance fluctuated. Interview findings further explained reasons for such differences (e.g., partly due to the nature of the integrated reading and writing task). The study results provide pedagogical implications for using integrated academic reading and writing tasks and sustained formative feedback for LOA.Learning-oriented assessment (LOA) has gained much attention for its potential to promote learning through assessment by creating a link between the two in various learning and assessment contexts (Assessment Reform Group, 2002; Black & Wiliam, 1998; Purpura & Turner, 2013). A number of previous studies have examined the effectiveness of feedback, an element of LOA, in L2 writing (e.g., Bitchener & Ferris, 2012; Ferris, 2003; Hyland & Hyland, 2006). Yet, few have explored how LOA could be implemented using an integrated reading and writing task, especially for English for academic purposes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of LOA of an L2 integrated reading and writing task for the development of EFL learners’ academic writing ability. This qualitative case study collected multiple sources of data (e.g., writing samples, teacher feedback, interview data) from learners and their instructor for a six-week period. Participants included ten graduate students majoring in TESOL at a Korean university enrolled in a research method course and their professor. Every week, each student completed an integrated reading and writing task as part of their classroom assessment, which required them to first read an academic research paper, and then write a summary and critique on it. On each completed integrated task, the instructor gave formative feedback involving detailed comments on the four areas of content, language, organization, and mechanics. After receiving feedback, students were required to revise their work and resubmit it with their new writing of a subsequent task. In addition, each student participated in a semi-structured interview to share their thoughts on the effectiveness of the formative feedback they received. The analysis focused on (1) the nature of instructor’s formative feedback and (2) improvements/changes in the students’ writing in accordance with the feedback provided. Students’ interview data were also analyzed to account for how the students perceived and used the instructor’s feedback to improve their writing. Findings indicated that the students displayed diverse developmental patterns in the content and organization dimensions. With regards to content, the first group of students continued to improve the content of summary and critique steadily throughout the six-week period. On the other hand, the second group did not provide any evidence of improvement over time. The last group showed rather unstable changes over the six weeks by displaying strengths and weaknesses in content in a random manner and then made progress in the final assessment; for organization, a couple of students showed a steady improvement while most other students’ performance fluctuated. Interview findings further explained reasons for such differences (e.g., partly due to the nature of the integrated reading and writing task). The study results provide pedagogical implications for using integrated academic reading and writing tasks and sustained formative feedback for LOA. Paper 12: Theoretical Paper on LOA in Applied Linguistics Time 4:05 – 4:50 (45) Speaker(s) Nick Saville & Angeliki Salamoura Cambridge English Language Assessment Title Learning Oriented Assessment A Systemic View from an Examination Provider Abstract For an examination provider the challenge is to combine familiar functions of language assessment, such as placement, diagnosis, monitoring and international certification, into a systemic relationship with formative types of assessment that result from planned or unplanned classroom interactions. How can assessment and teaching expertise be best combined to promote more effective learning? Researchers acknowledge the central role that assessment plays in second language classrooms and the need to relate assessment principles and practices to teaching and learning activities (Turner 2012). Empirical research is now providing useful insights into classroom-based assessment, but it is still not clear how this might fit within a coherent framework linking both formative and summative uses of assessment. In this talk, we propose a systemic approach to Learning Oriented Assessment (LOA) that describes how formal and informal assessments are conceptualized and implemented from a learning perspective. We show how external examinations can be combined with classroom-based assessment and illustrate how planned assessments, together with those occurring spontaneously through social interaction, contribute to the successful attainment of language learning outcomes. Finally, we note the roles that psychometric scaling and digital technology play in implementing LOA, and how the collection of large amounts of information (big data) can contribute to our understandings of learner autonomy and to the individualization of learning pathways within formal educational contexts.For an examination provider the challenge is to combine familiar functions of language assessment, such as placement, diagnosis, monitoring and international certification, into a systemic relationship with formative types of assessment that result from planned or unplanned classroom interactions. How can assessment and teaching expertise be best combined to promote more effective learning? Researchers acknowledge the central role that assessment plays in second language classrooms and the need to relate assessment principles and practices to teaching and learning activities (Turner 2012). Empirical research is now providing useful insights into classroom-based assessment, but it is still not clear how this might fit within a coherent framework linking both formative and summative uses of assessment. In this talk, we propose a systemic approach to Learning Oriented Assessment (LOA) that describes how formal and informal assessments are conceptualized and implemented from a learning perspective. We show how external examinations can be combined with classroom-based assessment and illustrate how planned assessments, together with those occurring spontaneously through social interaction, contribute to the successful attainment of language learning outcomes. Finally, we note the roles that psychometric scaling and digital technology play in implementing LOA, and how the collection of large amounts of information (big data) can contribute to our understandings of learner autonomy and to the individualization of learning pathways within formal educational contexts. Paper 13: Empirical Paper of LOA Time 4:50 – 5:20 (30) Speaker(s) Payman Vafaee, Yuichi Suzuki & Eric Pelzl University of Maryland Title How Aptitude-treatment-interaction Studies can Benefit Learning-oriented Assessment Abstract Learning-oriented assessment (LOA) aims to assist learners in the development of target-like second language (L2) performance over time by prioritizing the role of L2 processing and learning outcomes. It focuses not only on assessment but also on how instruction and feedback can be tailored to L2 learning (Purpura & Turner, 2013). For this reason, LOA needs to be informed not only by a theory of L2 testing, but also by a theory of L2 learning (Purpura, 2004). While previous studies have attempted to apply L2 learning theories to assessment (Chapelle et al., 2010), the present paper aims to demonstrate how L2 theories can contribute to the instruction component under the LOA framework. Specifically, the current conceptual paper provides a meta-analytic review of findings from aptitude-treatment-interaction (ATI) research to empirically support the instruction component of LOA. Purpura (2004) tried to tie his model of grammar testing to VanPatten’s (1996) L2 learning model, to conceptualize a model for LOA. VanPatten’s input-processing model explains how learners process L2 input through a set of principles and corollaries that interact in complex ways with working memory (WM). The major principles of this model are predicated on a limited WM capacity for processing information, and predict that learners, especially at lower proficiency levels, will fail to make the right formmeaning/function connections during real-time comprehension due to the constrained capacity of WM (VanPatten, 2007). This highlights the importance of considering individual cognitive differences when making predictions about the effectiveness of any kind of intervention. These findings are also in line with the SLA field’s growing interest in ATI research, which seeks empirical evidence to inform the tailoring of instruction based on learners’ individual differences (DeKeyser, 2012; Vatz, Tare, Jackson, Doughty, 2013). In the current paper, we will first summarize the major findings of ATI research, and then suggest several ways in which LOA might benefit from these findings. Due to the small number of studies originally conceptualized as ATI, our review includes studies that had an interaction component between cognitive aptitudes and instructional treatments. For example, Erlam (2005) showed that individual differences in WM and language analytic ability mediate the effectiveness of input-based treatments regardless of the presence or absence of metalinguistic information. At the same time, the results suggested that providing metalinguistic information may neutralize individual cognitive differences when learners are involved in production-based practice. Additional insights can be gained from a growing number of empirical studies examining how individual differences interact with the effectiveness of feedback (e.g., Goo, 2012; Révész, 2012; Sheen, 2007; Yilmaz, 2013). Individual differences in WM and language analytic ability have been found to play differential roles in mediating the effects of several types of feedback (e.g., recasts, explicit correction). In sum, we will zero in on the effectiveness of different types of instruction and feedback based on ATI research findings. These findings have important implications for the individualization of learning and feedback in LOA, and the issue of fairness in LOA if interventions are implemented at a group level.Learning-oriented assessment (LOA) aims to assist learners in the development of target-like second language (L2) performance over time by prioritizing the role of L2 processing and learning outcomes. It focuses not only on assessment but also on how instruction and feedback can be tailored to L2 learning (Purpura & Turner, 2013). For this reason, LOA needs to be informed not only by a theory of L2 testing, but also by a theory of L2 learning (Purpura, 2004). While previous studies have attempted to apply L2 learning theories to assessment (Chapelle et al., 2010), the present paper aims to demonstrate how L2 theories can contribute to the instruction component under the LOA framework. Specifically, the current conceptual paper provides a meta-analytic review of findings from aptitude-treatment-interaction (ATI) research to empirically support the instruction component of LOA. Purpura (2004) tried to tie his model of grammar testing to VanPatten’s (1996) L2 learning model, to conceptualize a model for LOA. VanPatten’s input-processing model explains how learners process L2 input through a set of principles and corollaries that interact in complex ways with working memory (WM). The major principles of this model are predicated on a limited WM capacity for processing information, and predict that learners, especially at lower proficiency levels, will fail to make the right formmeaning/function connections during real-time comprehension due to the constrained capacity of WM (VanPatten, 2007). This highlights the importance of considering individual cognitive differences when making predictions about the effectiveness of any kind of intervention. These findings are also in line with the SLA field’s growing interest in ATI research, which seeks empirical evidence to inform the tailoring of instruction based on learners’ individual differences (DeKeyser, 2012; Vatz, Tare, Jackson, Doughty, 2013). In the current paper, we will first summarize the major findings of ATI research, and then suggest several ways in which LOA might benefit from these findings. Due to the small number of studies originally conceptualized as ATI, our review includes studies that had an interaction component between cognitive aptitudes and instructional treatments. For example, Erlam (2005) showed that individual differences in WM and language analytic ability mediate the effectiveness of input-based treatments regardless of the presence or absence of metalinguistic information. At the same time, the results suggested that providing metalinguistic information may neutralize individual cognitive differences when learners are involved in production-based practice. Additional insights can be gained from a growing number of empirical studies examining how individual differences interact with the effectiveness of feedback (e.g., Goo, 2012; Révész, 2012; Sheen, 2007; Yilmaz, 2013). Individual differences in WM and language analytic ability have been found to play differential roles in mediating the effects of several types of feedback (e.g., recasts, explicit correction). In sum, we will zero in on the effectiveness of different types of instruction and feedback based on ATI research findings. These findings have important implications for the individualization of learning and feedback in LOA, and the issue of fairness in LOA if interventions are implemented at a group level. Paper 14: Application Paper on LOA Time 5:20 – 6:05 (45) Speaker(s) Lee B. Abraham, Paul Stengel & Steve Welsh