Computer-Assisted Language Testing and Learner Behavior

  • Brett MillinerEmail author
  • Blair Barr
Part of the New Language Learning and Teaching Environments book series (NLLTE)


This chapter reports on a survey of 304 Japanese university students who completed a range of formative computer-assisted tests while studying in an English as a foreign language (EFL) class. We consider students’ attitudes toward the use of computer-assisted language testing (CALT) for formative assessment tasks and, more importantly, whether automated feedback influenced their behavior and learning. In short, we discovered that students overwhelmingly (77.7%) prefer CALT (opposed to paper-based testing or homework), and if available, students generally retake the tests for revision purposes. The authors hope that this chapter can promote a more effective implementation of CALT for formative assessment, as well as provide practical insights into how language learners are interpreting and acting upon automated feedback.


  1. Bracher, J. (2013). A survey of online teaching by native-speaker English instructors at Japanese universities. The JALT CALL Journal, 9(3), 221–239.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, J. D. (2013). Research on computers in language testing: Past, present and future. In M. Thomas, H. Reinders, & M. Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 73–94). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  3. Chapelle, C. A., & Chung, Y. (2010). The promise of NLP and speech processing technologies in language assessment. Language Testing, 27(3), 301–315. Scholar
  4. Chapelle, C. A., & Douglas, D. (2006). Assessing language through computer technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chapelle, C. A., & Voss, E. (2016). 20 years of technology and language assessment in Language Learning & Technology. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 116–128. Scholar
  6. Cote, T. J., & Milliner, B. (2017). Preparing Japanese students’ digital literacy for study-abroad: How much CALL training is needed? The JALT CALL Journal, 13(3), 187–197.Google Scholar
  7. Ćukušić, M., Garača, Z., & Jadrić, M. (2013). Online self-assessment and students’ success in higher education institutions. Computers & Education, 72, 100–109. Scholar
  8. Douglas, D., & Hegelheimer, V. (2007). Assessing language using computer technology. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 115–132. New York: Cambridge University Press. Scholar
  9. Fargeeh, A. I. (2015). EFL student and faculty perceptions of and attitudes towards online testing in the medium of Blackboard: Promises and challenges. The JALT CALL Journal, 11(1), 41–62.Google Scholar
  10. Garcia Laborda, J. (2007). On the net: Introducing standardized ESL/EFL exams. Language Learning & Technology, 11(2), 3–9. Scholar
  11. Gobel, P., & Kano, M. (2014). Mobile natives, Japanese university students’ use of digital technology. In J. B. Son (Ed.), Computer-assisted language learning: Learners, teachers and tools (pp. 21–46). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  12. Godwin-Jones, R. (2008). Web-writing 2.0: Enabling, documenting, and assessing writing online. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 7–13. Scholar
  13. Kenyon, D. M., & Malabonga, V. (2001). Comparing examinee attitudes towards computer assisted and other oral proficiency assessments. Language Learning & Technology, 5(2), 60–83. Scholar
  14. Milliner, B., & Cote, T. (2018). Faculty adoption, application, and perceptions of a CMS in a university English language program. In B. Zou & M. Thomas (Eds.), Integrating technology into contemporary language learning and teaching (pp. 161–175). Hershey PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Murray, A., & Blyth, A. (2011). A survey of Japanese university students’ computer literacy levels. The JALT CALL Journal, 7(3), 307–318.Google Scholar
  16. Noijons, J. (1994). Testing computer assisted language testing: Towards a checklist for CALT. CALICO Journal, 12(1), 37–58.Google Scholar
  17. Paris, S. H., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89–101. Scholar
  18. Reinders, H. (2018). Learning analytics for language learning and teaching. The JALT CALL Journal, 14(1), 77–86.Google Scholar
  19. Roever, C. (2001). Web-based language testing. Language Learning & Technology, 5(2), 34–37. Scholar
  20. Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history and typology. In L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 15–30). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Suvorov, R., & Hegelheimer, V. (2014). Computer assisted language testing. In J. Kunnan (Ed.), The companion to language assessment (pp. 593–613). Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Scholar
  22. Teo, A. (2012). Promoting EFL students’ inferential reading skills through computerized dynamic assessment. Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 10–20.
  23. Vanderkleij, F. M., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Timmers, C. F., & Veldkamp, C. (2011). Effects of feedback in a computer-based assessment for learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 263–272. Scholar
  24. Wang, T. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 73, 189–203. Scholar
  25. Ware, P., & Kessler, G. (2013). CALL and digital feedback. In M. Thomas, H. Reinders, & M. Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 323–339). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tamagawa UniversityMachidaJapan

Personalised recommendations