The Disadvantages of Interact and Suggested Improvements

  • Martin East
Part of the Educational Linguistics book series (EDUL, volume 26)


This chapter focuses on the comparative disadvantages of interact, and suggestions for improvement to interact, emerging from Stage I of the two-stage study. Findings from the open-ended section of the survey (Section II) are compared to those elicited from the teacher interviews, and reveal several challenges for interact in practice. The data indicate that several perceptual problems emerge from an understanding that the assessments associated with interact contributed to a high-stakes assessment system. Interact was considered to be highly impractical. Teachers also struggled with understanding what was meant by the expectation that performances should be spontaneous and unrehearsed. Because of its high-stakes nature, students would inevitably wish to do as well as they could on the assessment. This had implications for the extent to which the assessment could measure instances of genuine and unrehearsed spoken interaction as it took place in class. Several suggestions for improvement to interact were proposed.


Target Language Task Type Assessment Task Unrealistic Expectation European Language 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. University of Cambridge. (2014). IGCSE syllabus for Dutch, French, German and Spanish. Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge International Examinations.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin East
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Social WorkThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations