ELI listening / speaking diagnostic activities
The rating scales for the oral presentation and group discussion activities
Developed by Yusuke Fujisawa
Fall 2004

Aspects to be rated
oral presentation
Fluency
Intelligibility
Vocabulary
Organization/ coherence
Delivery
group discussion
Fluency
Intelligibility
Vocabulary
Communicative skills/strategies
Discussion content
 Scale level definitions
For each category, the scale points are to be matched to the level described below.
scale point
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
For teachers
level description
sufficient level
acceptable level
close to acceptable level
insufficient level
not measurable
For students
level description
excellent
very good
ok
need more improvement
not measurable
Sufficient level / excellent level
The level which is considered sufficient in real academic classes
Acceptable level / very good level
The level which is considered acceptable in real academic classes
Close to acceptable level / ok level
The level which is considered not acceptable in real academic classes, but very close
to that level
Insufficient level / need more improvement level
The level which is considered insufficient in real academic classes
1
 Detailed descriptors for each aspect
Oral Presentation
Fluency
Key features
 Speaking rate
 Length of utterance unit
 Filled/unfilled pauses
 Natural/unnatural position for pauses (natural:at clause juncture or at the end of phrases)
 Frequency of disfluency markers (Hesitations, repetitions, self-corrections, and false
starts)
* Fluency is defined here only from temporal perspective.
4.0
Can produce smooth and continuous discourse with fairly high and even tempo.
Very few unfilled pauses in unnatural/unlikely positions in an utterance occur.
3.0
Can produce relatively long discourse with fairly even tempo.
Sometimes student make noticeable pauses in unnatural/unlikely position in an utterance and may
be hesitant for searching patterns and expressions, repetition, self-correction.
2.0
Can keep going comprehensively, even though pausing for grammatical and lexical planning and
repair in unnatural/ unlikely positions is evident, especially in longer stretches of production.
1.0
Can produce slow and often short discourse with many unfilled pauses in unnatural/unlikely
positions of utterances.
Utterances are hesitant and often contain repetitions, self-corrections, false starts.
0.0
No utterances.
2
Oral Presentation
Intelligibility
Key features
 rhythm, intonation, articulation
4.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation are easily comprehensible to everyone.
3.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation are reasonably comprehensible to competent listeners.
L1 influence may be evident and occasional errors occur but do not cause comprehension
problems.
2.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation require concentrated listening, but only an occasional
intelligibility problem arises.
1.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation often impede comprehension, sometimes difficult to
understand even with concentrated listening.
0.0
No utterances.
3
Oral Presentation
Vocabulary
Key features
 knowledge of English collocations, idiomatic expressions
 appropriateness and accuracy of word choices in a given context.
4.0
Has a good command of a broad range of language allowing his/her to select a formulation to
express him/herself clearly in an appropriate style without having to restrict what he/she wants to
say.
3.0
Has a sufficient range of language to be able to give clear descriptions, express viewpoints
without much obvious lexical inaccuracies.
2.0
Has enough language to get by, with sufficient vocabulary to express him/herself with some
lexical inaccuracies and circumlocutions.
1.0
Use basic sentence patterns with memorized phrases. Lexical inaccuracies may cause
comprehension problems.
0.0
No utterances
4
Oral Presentation
Organization/ coherence
Key features
 main idea and support
 structure (opening, main body, summary)
 organizational device
4.0
Very good organization/coherence in oral discourse
Smooth and attractive introduction and conclusion, good support for main idea(s) with adequate
evidence. Clear organizational devices.
3.0
Clear main idea(s) with support with evidence.
Introduction and conclusion are clear.
Some deficiencies in organizational devices (discourse signals)
2.0
Main idea is identifiable but not adequately supported.
Underlying structure is not sufficiently apparent.
1.0
Main idea is difficult to grasp.
No apparent structure to follow.
0.0
No utterances
5
Oral Presentation
Delivery
Key features
 visual aid (optional)*
 body language
 eye contact
 volume of voice
 time use
* For the oral presentation activity, the use of visual aid is not expected.
4.0
Presentation is delivered very effectively in a clear and sufficient volume of voice with effective
body language and eye contact.
(Visual aid is effectively used.)
Given time is efficiently used.
3.0
Presentation is delivered clearly within a pre-set time (with the aid of visual materials.)
Adequate body language and eye contact is given to the audience.
2.0
(Visual aid is not adequately used.) He/she slightly passes the pre-set time or the presentation is
rather short.
1.0
Presentation is delivered with few body language and eye contact as if reading a manuscript.
(Visual aids were not adequately used.)
The volume of the voice may hinder comprehension.
He/she passes pre-set time to a large extent or his/her presentation is too short.
0.0
No utterances
6
Group Discussion
Fluency
Key features
 Speaking rate
 Length of utterance unit
 Filled/unfilled pauses
 Natural/unnatural position for pauses (natural:at clause juncture or at the end of phrases)
 Frequency of disfluency markers (Hesitations, repetitions, self-corrections, and false
starts)
* Fluency is defined here only from temporal perspective.
4.0
Can produce smooth and continuous discourse with fairly high and even tempo.
Very few unfilled pauses in unnatural/unlikely positions in an utterance occur.
3.0
Can produce relatively long discourse with fairly even tempo.
Sometimes student make noticeable pauses in unnatural/unlikely position in an utterance and may
be hesitant for searching patterns and expressions, repetition, self-correction.
2.0
Can keep going comprehensively, even though pausing for grammatical and lexical planning and
repair in unnatural/ unlikely positions is evident, especially in longer stretches of production.
1.0
Can produce short discourse with many unfilled pauses in unnatural/unlikely positions of
utterances.
Utterances are sometimes hesitant and contain repetitions, self-corrections, false starts.
0.0
No utterances.
7
Group Discussion
Intelligibility
Key features
 rhythm, intonation, articulation
4.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation are easily comprehensible to everyone.
3.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation are reasonably comprehensible to competent listeners.
L1 influence may be evident and occasional errors occur but do not cause comprehension
problems.
2.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation require concentrated listening, but only an occasional
intelligibility problem arises.
1.0
Rhythm, intonation, and articulation often impede comprehension, sometimes difficult to
understand even with concentrated listening.
0.0
No utterances.
8
Presentation & Discussion
Vocabulary
Key features
 knowledge of English collocations, idiomatic expressions
 appropriateness and accuracy of word choices in a given context.
4.0
Has a good command of a broad range of language allowing his/her to select a formulation to
express him/herself clearly in an appropriate style without having to restrict what he/she wants to
say.
3.0
Has a sufficient range of language to be able to give clear descriptions, express viewpoints
without much obvious lexical inaccuracies.
2.0
Has enough language to get by, with sufficient vocabulary to express him/herself with some
lexical inaccuracies and circumlocutions.
1.0
Has basic language to convey rather simple ideas.
comprehension problems.
0.0
No utterances
9
Lexical inaccuracies may cause
Discussion
Communicative skills/strategies
Key features
 negotiate of meaning
 response
 eye contact
 gesture
4.0
Asks others to expand on views; shows ability to negotiate meaning; shows how own and others’
ideas are related; even, confident distribution of eye contact; use appropriate gestures; when
listening use gestures and other cues to take the floor.
3.0
Responds to others; show agreement of disagreement to others’ opinions; eye contact maintained,
but not used for turn taking, or emphasizing points; some spontaneous gestures.
2.0
Does not initiate interaction, produces monologue only, shows some turn taking, may say “I
agree with you” but does not relate ideas in explanation; limited eye contact; often directed at one
person when speaking; may look down or away if not speaking; gestures are rare
1.0
Mainly participate by active listening such as nodding, but not much by speaking.
0.0
Not measurable
10
Discussion
Discussion content
Key features
 quality of main ideas and support
 quality of contribution
4.0
Interesting, engaging content; a high level of personal response and rationalization.
3.0
Interesting and thoughtful; main ideas and examples are clearly distinguished.
2.0
Main points supported by details and examples; imaginative and interesting
1.0
Main points hard to identify; supporting details or examples were not adequate.
0.0
No utterances
11