J

• Abidin, S. A. Z., & Jamil, A. (2015). Toward an English proficiency test for postgraduates in Malaysia. SAGE Open, 5(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015597725

• Angouri, J., & Marra, M. (2010). Corporate meetings as genre: A study of the role of chair in corporate meeting talk. Text and Talk, 30(6), 615-363. http://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2010.030

• Asmuß, B. (2013). Conversation analysis and meetings. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 2006-2008). http://doi.org/10.1002/978140598431.wbeal0210

• Asmuß, B., & Svennevig, J. (2009). Meeting talk. Journal of Business Communication, 46(1), 3-22. http://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608326761

• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.

• Basturkmen, H., & Elder, C. (2004). The practice of LSP. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 672-694). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757000.ch27

• Brooks, L. (2003). Converting an observation checklist for use with the IELTS speaking test. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 11, 20-21.

• Bruton, A. (2002). From tasking purposes to purposing task. ELT Journal, 56(3), 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.3.280

• Byram, M., & Parmenter, L. (Eds.) (2012). The Common European Framework of reference: The globalisation of language education policy. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847697318

• Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.

• Council of Europe. (2020a) Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment - Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.

• Council of Europe (2020b). The Common European Framework of reference for languages. Council of Europe Publishing.

• Deygers, B., & Van Gorp, K. (2015). Determining the scoring validity of a co-constructed CEFR-based rating scale. Language Testing, 32(4), 521-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215575626

• Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Van Gorp, K. (2018a). The use of the CEFR in higher education: A brief introduction to this special issue. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421957

• Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Van Gorp, K. (Eds.) (2018b). Special issue: Language tests for academic enrolment and the CEFR. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 1-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421957

• Don, Z. M., & Abdullah, M. H. (2019, May 17). What the CEFR is and isn’t. Free Malaysia Today. https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2019/05/27/what-the-cefr-is-and-isnt/

• Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge University Press.

• Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3-65). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.1.2.08ade

• East, M. (2016). Assessing foreign language students' spoken proficiency: Stakeholder perspectives on assessment innovation. Springer.

• Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

• Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107

• Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B. A., & Paik, M. C. (2003). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (3rd ed.). Wiley-Interscience.

• Foley, J. (2019). Issues on assessment using CEFR in the Region. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 12(2), 28-28.

• Fulcher, G. (2004). Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 253-266. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0104_4

• Galaczi, E., & Taylor, L. (2018). Interactional competence: Conceptualisations, operationalisations, and outstanding questions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(3), 218-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2018.1453816

• Hulstijn, J. H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimensions of language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 91, 663-667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_5.x

• İlin, G. (2014). Student-teacher judgements on Common European Framework: Efficacy, feasibility and reality. Journal of Language and Literature Education, 9, 8-19. https://doi.org/10.12973/jlle.11.221

• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

• McNamara, T. (2014). 30 years on–evolution or revolution? Language Assessment Quarterly, 11, 226-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.895830

• McNamara, T., Hill, K., & May L. (2002). Discourse and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 221-242. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190502000120

• Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. ETS Research Report series, 1996(1), i-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1996.tb01695.x

• Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2016, April 27). Executive summary: Malaysia education blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

• Nakatsuhara, F. (2013). The co-construction of conversation in group oral test. Language Testing and Evaluation, 30. Peter Lang.

• North, B. (2014). The CEFR in practice. English Profile Studies, 4. Cambridge University Press.

• Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.

• O’Sullivan, B., Weir, C. J. & Saville, N. (2002). Using observation checklists to validate speaking-test tasks. Language Testing, 19(1), 33-56. http://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt219oa

• Read, J. (2019). The influence of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in the Asia-Pacific region. LEARN Journal, 12(1), 12-18.

• Shak, P. (2014). Incorporating task-based group project work in English for Occupational Purposes Course: The instructors’ perspectives. MANU Journal, 21, 77-97.

• Shak, P. (2016). Taken for a ride: Students’ coping strategies for free-riding in group work. Pertanika Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 24(1), 401-414.

• Shak, P. (2019). Towards a framework for effective group oral assessment in the ESP classroom [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. University of Auckland.

• Shehadeh, A. (2017). Foreword: New frontiers in task-based language teaching. In M. Ahmadian & M. Mayo (Eds.). Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching (pp. vii-xxi). De Gruyter Mouton. http://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503399-015

• Shehadeh, A. (2018). Task-based language assessment. In J. I. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. (pp. 1-6). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0379

• Sim, J., & Wright, C. C. (2005). The Kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Physical Therapy, 85(3), 257-268. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/85.3.257

• Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.

• Svennevig, J. (2012a). Interaction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 3-10. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427203

• Svennevig, J. (2012b). The agenda as a resource for topic introduction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 53-66. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427204

• Taylor, B. P. (1983). Teaching ESL: Incorporating a communicative, student-centered component. TESOL Quarterly, 17(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586425

• van Batenburg, E. S. L., Oostdam, R. J., van Gelderen, A. J. S., & de Jong, N. H. (2018). Measuring L2 speakers’ interactional ability using interactive speech tasks. Language Testing, 35(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216679452

• Vierra, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The Kappa statistics. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360-363.

• Weir, C. (2005a). Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing, 22(3) 281-300. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt309oa

• Weir, C. J. (2005b). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Palgrave Macmillan.

• Woodward-Kron, R., & Elder, C. (2015). A comparative discourse study of simulated clinical roleplays in two assessment contexts: Validating a specific-purpose language test. Language Testing, 33(2), 251-270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215607399

• Zacharias, N. T. (2012). Qualitative research methods for second language education: A coursebook. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

• Abidin, S. A. Z., & Jamil, A. (2015). Toward an English proficiency test for postgraduates in Malaysia. SAGE Open, 5(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015597725

• Angouri, J., & Marra, M. (2010). Corporate meetings as genre: A study of the role of chair in corporate meeting talk. Text and Talk, 30(6), 615-363. http://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2010.030

• Asmuß, B. (2013). Conversation analysis and meetings. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 2006-2008). http://doi.org/10.1002/978140598431.wbeal0210

• Asmuß, B., & Svennevig, J. (2009). Meeting talk. Journal of Business Communication, 46(1), 3-22. http://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608326761

• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.

• Basturkmen, H., & Elder, C. (2004). The practice of LSP. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 672-694). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757000.ch27

• Brooks, L. (2003). Converting an observation checklist for use with the IELTS speaking test. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 11, 20-21.

• Bruton, A. (2002). From tasking purposes to purposing task. ELT Journal, 56(3), 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.3.280

• Byram, M., & Parmenter, L. (Eds.) (2012). The Common European Framework of reference: The globalisation of language education policy. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847697318

• Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.

• Council of Europe. (2020a) Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment - Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.

• Council of Europe (2020b). The Common European Framework of reference for languages. Council of Europe Publishing.

• Deygers, B., & Van Gorp, K. (2015). Determining the scoring validity of a co-constructed CEFR-based rating scale. Language Testing, 32(4), 521-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215575626

• Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Van Gorp, K. (2018a). The use of the CEFR in higher education: A brief introduction to this special issue. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421957

• Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Van Gorp, K. (Eds.) (2018b). Special issue: Language tests for academic enrolment and the CEFR. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 1-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421957

• Don, Z. M., & Abdullah, M. H. (2019, May 17). What the CEFR is and isn’t. Free Malaysia Today. https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2019/05/27/what-the-cefr-is-and-isnt/

• Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge University Press.

• Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3-65). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.1.2.08ade

• East, M. (2016). Assessing foreign language students' spoken proficiency: Stakeholder perspectives on assessment innovation. Springer.

• Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

• Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107

• Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B. A., & Paik, M. C. (2003). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (3rd ed.). Wiley-Interscience.

• Foley, J. (2019). Issues on assessment using CEFR in the Region. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 12(2), 28-28.

• Fulcher, G. (2004). Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 253-266. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0104_4

• Galaczi, E., & Taylor, L. (2018). Interactional competence: Conceptualisations, operationalisations, and outstanding questions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(3), 218-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2018.1453816

• Hulstijn, J. H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimensions of language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 91, 663-667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_5.x

• İlin, G. (2014). Student-teacher judgements on Common European Framework: Efficacy, feasibility and reality. Journal of Language and Literature Education, 9, 8-19. https://doi.org/10.12973/jlle.11.221

• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

• McNamara, T. (2014). 30 years on–evolution or revolution? Language Assessment Quarterly, 11, 226-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.895830

• McNamara, T., Hill, K., & May L. (2002). Discourse and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 221-242. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190502000120

• Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. ETS Research Report series, 1996(1), i-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1996.tb01695.x

• Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2016, April 27). Executive summary: Malaysia education blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

• Nakatsuhara, F. (2013). The co-construction of conversation in group oral test. Language Testing and Evaluation, 30. Peter Lang.

• North, B. (2014). The CEFR in practice. English Profile Studies, 4. Cambridge University Press.

• Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.

• O’Sullivan, B., Weir, C. J. & Saville, N. (2002). Using observation checklists to validate speaking-test tasks. Language Testing, 19(1), 33-56. http://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt219oa

• Read, J. (2019). The influence of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in the Asia-Pacific region. LEARN Journal, 12(1), 12-18.

• Shak, P. (2014). Incorporating task-based group project work in English for Occupational Purposes Course: The instructors’ perspectives. MANU Journal, 21, 77-97.

• Shak, P. (2016). Taken for a ride: Students’ coping strategies for free-riding in group work. Pertanika Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 24(1), 401-414.

• Shak, P. (2019). Towards a framework for effective group oral assessment in the ESP classroom [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. University of Auckland.

• Shehadeh, A. (2017). Foreword: New frontiers in task-based language teaching. In M. Ahmadian & M. Mayo (Eds.). Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching (pp. vii-xxi). De Gruyter Mouton. http://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503399-015

• Shehadeh, A. (2018). Task-based language assessment. In J. I. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. (pp. 1-6). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0379

• Sim, J., & Wright, C. C. (2005). The Kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Physical Therapy, 85(3), 257-268. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/85.3.257

• Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.

• Svennevig, J. (2012a). Interaction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 3-10. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427203

• Svennevig, J. (2012b). The agenda as a resource for topic introduction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 53-66. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427204

• Taylor, B. P. (1983). Teaching ESL: Incorporating a communicative, student-centered component. TESOL Quarterly, 17(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586425

• van Batenburg, E. S. L., Oostdam, R. J., van Gelderen, A. J. S., & de Jong, N. H. (2018). Measuring L2 speakers’ interactional ability using interactive speech tasks. Language Testing, 35(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216679452

• Vierra, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The Kappa statistics. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360-363.

• Weir, C. (2005a). Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing, 22(3) 281-300. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt309oa

• Weir, C. J. (2005b). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Palgrave Macmillan.

• Woodward-Kron, R., & Elder, C. (2015). A comparative discourse study of simulated clinical roleplays in two assessment contexts: Validating a specific-purpose language test. Language Testing, 33(2), 251-270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215607399

• Zacharias, N. T. (2012). Qualitative research methods for second language education: A coursebook. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

• Abidin, S. A. Z., & Jamil, A. (2015). Toward an English proficiency test for postgraduates in Malaysia. SAGE Open, 5(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015597725

• Angouri, J., & Marra, M. (2010). Corporate meetings as genre: A study of the role of chair in corporate meeting talk. Text and Talk, 30(6), 615-363. http://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2010.030

• Asmuß, B. (2013). Conversation analysis and meetings. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 2006-2008). http://doi.org/10.1002/978140598431.wbeal0210

• Asmuß, B., & Svennevig, J. (2009). Meeting talk. Journal of Business Communication, 46(1), 3-22. http://doi.org/10.1177/0021943608326761

• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford University Press.

• Basturkmen, H., & Elder, C. (2004). The practice of LSP. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 672-694). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757000.ch27

• Brooks, L. (2003). Converting an observation checklist for use with the IELTS speaking test. Cambridge ESOL Research Notes, 11, 20-21.

• Bruton, A. (2002). From tasking purposes to purposing task. ELT Journal, 56(3), 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.3.280

• Byram, M., & Parmenter, L. (Eds.) (2012). The Common European Framework of reference: The globalisation of language education policy. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847697318

• Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.

• Council of Europe. (2020a) Common European Framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment - Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing.

• Council of Europe (2020b). The Common European Framework of reference for languages. Council of Europe Publishing.

• Deygers, B., & Van Gorp, K. (2015). Determining the scoring validity of a co-constructed CEFR-based rating scale. Language Testing, 32(4), 521-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215575626

• Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Van Gorp, K. (2018a). The use of the CEFR in higher education: A brief introduction to this special issue. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421957

• Deygers, B., Carlsen, C. H., Saville, N., & Van Gorp, K. (Eds.) (2018b). Special issue: Language tests for academic enrolment and the CEFR. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 1-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1421957

• Don, Z. M., & Abdullah, M. H. (2019, May 17). What the CEFR is and isn’t. Free Malaysia Today. https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2019/05/27/what-the-cefr-is-and-isnt/

• Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge University Press.

• Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3-65). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.1.2.08ade

• East, M. (2016). Assessing foreign language students' spoken proficiency: Stakeholder perspectives on assessment innovation. Springer.

• Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

• Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500107

• Fleiss, J. L., Levin, B. A., & Paik, M. C. (2003). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (3rd ed.). Wiley-Interscience.

• Foley, J. (2019). Issues on assessment using CEFR in the Region. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 12(2), 28-28.

• Fulcher, G. (2004). Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1, 253-266. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0104_4

• Galaczi, E., & Taylor, L. (2018). Interactional competence: Conceptualisations, operationalisations, and outstanding questions. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(3), 218-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2018.1453816

• Hulstijn, J. H. (2007). The shaky ground beneath the CEFR: Quantitative and qualitative dimensions of language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 91, 663-667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_5.x

• İlin, G. (2014). Student-teacher judgements on Common European Framework: Efficacy, feasibility and reality. Journal of Language and Literature Education, 9, 8-19. https://doi.org/10.12973/jlle.11.221

• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

• McNamara, T. (2014). 30 years on–evolution or revolution? Language Assessment Quarterly, 11, 226-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2014.895830

• McNamara, T., Hill, K., & May L. (2002). Discourse and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 221-242. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190502000120

• Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. ETS Research Report series, 1996(1), i-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1996.tb01695.x

• Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2016, April 27). Executive summary: Malaysia education blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

• Nakatsuhara, F. (2013). The co-construction of conversation in group oral test. Language Testing and Evaluation, 30. Peter Lang.

• North, B. (2014). The CEFR in practice. English Profile Studies, 4. Cambridge University Press.

• Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.

• O’Sullivan, B., Weir, C. J. & Saville, N. (2002). Using observation checklists to validate speaking-test tasks. Language Testing, 19(1), 33-56. http://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt219oa

• Read, J. (2019). The influence of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in the Asia-Pacific region. LEARN Journal, 12(1), 12-18.

• Shak, P. (2014). Incorporating task-based group project work in English for Occupational Purposes Course: The instructors’ perspectives. MANU Journal, 21, 77-97.

• Shak, P. (2016). Taken for a ride: Students’ coping strategies for free-riding in group work. Pertanika Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 24(1), 401-414.

• Shak, P. (2019). Towards a framework for effective group oral assessment in the ESP classroom [Unpublished Doctoral dissertation]. University of Auckland.

• Shehadeh, A. (2017). Foreword: New frontiers in task-based language teaching. In M. Ahmadian & M. Mayo (Eds.). Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching (pp. vii-xxi). De Gruyter Mouton. http://doi.org/10.1515/9781501503399-015

• Shehadeh, A. (2018). Task-based language assessment. In J. I. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. (pp. 1-6). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0379

• Sim, J., & Wright, C. C. (2005). The Kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Physical Therapy, 85(3), 257-268. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/85.3.257

• Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford University Press.

• Svennevig, J. (2012a). Interaction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 3-10. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427203

• Svennevig, J. (2012b). The agenda as a resource for topic introduction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 53-66. http://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427204

• Taylor, B. P. (1983). Teaching ESL: Incorporating a communicative, student-centered component. TESOL Quarterly, 17(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586425

• van Batenburg, E. S. L., Oostdam, R. J., van Gelderen, A. J. S., & de Jong, N. H. (2018). Measuring L2 speakers’ interactional ability using interactive speech tasks. Language Testing, 35(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216679452

• Vierra, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The Kappa statistics. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360-363.

• Weir, C. (2005a). Limitations of the Common European Framework for developing comparable examinations and tests. Language Testing, 22(3) 281-300. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532205lt309oa

• Weir, C. J. (2005b). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Palgrave Macmillan.

• Woodward-Kron, R., & Elder, C. (2015). A comparative discourse study of simulated clinical roleplays in two assessment contexts: Validating a specific-purpose language test. Language Testing, 33(2), 251-270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215607399

• Zacharias, N. T. (2012). Qualitative research methods for second language education: A coursebook. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.