LearnHub

Types and Purpose of Tests.

Language tests can be written for many different purposes.  It is important for prescribers (teachers, administrators, governments, etc.) to have a clear of the various uses the test design can be used for, so that the resulting scores are not misused or misinterpreted in ways that negatively affect language programs and learners’ lives.  The main purposes are: achievement tests; admission tests, placement tests, progress tests, aptitude tests, proficiency tests,  performance tests,  diagnostic tests, achievement tests, and dominance tests.

(Definitions from Learning About Language Assessment: Dilemmas, Decisions, and Directions by Kathleen M. Bailey, 1998. Newbury house Teacher Development)

Achievement tests:  Assessment instrument or procedures based on the objectives of a course, used to determine how much of the course content students have learned.

Admission tests: An instrument or procedure used to provide information about whether or not a candidate is likely to succeed in a particular program.  (These test are sometimes referred to as screening tests.)

Aptitude tests:  Assessment instruments which do not test someone’s kill in a particular language _ rather they are intended to assess a person’s ability to learn any language.

Diagnostic tests: An assessment instrument or procedure that attempts to diagnose, or identify, a learner’s strengths and weaknesses, typically so that an efficient and appropriate course of instruction can be presented.

Dominance tests: Determine which side of your brain left or right is dominant.  (This definition is from: http://www.web-us.com/BRAIN/braindominance.htm)

Performance tests: A test in which the learner’s responses involves comprehending and producing language under the types of contextual constraints that would be involved in performing one’s job.  The authenticity of the stimulus material and the task posed to the learner are central concerns in designing performance tests.

Placement tests:  An assessment instrument or procedure used to determine a student’s language skills relative to the levels of a particular program (s)he is about to enter.

Proficiency tests: Tests that are instrument or procedure used to determine a student’s ability against criteria for the purpose of determining how effective his/her use of a language. (Chris Babowal)

Progress tests: Tests or quizzes used as part of an ongoing assessment procedure during the course of instruction.  Progress tests must be very closely tied to the course content.

ACTIVITY: Please take the test named ‘Test Purpose” from ‘Learning About Language Assessment: Dilemmas, Decisions, and Directions’ by Kathleen M. Bailey, Published by Newbury House Teacher Development.

When choosing an assessment tool, accuracy of decisions made in relation to the standards used is extremely important.  If the assessment purports results are presented in pass/fail or levels, how accurate are these particular standards within the context and then for your particular program.  The validity of the criteria used to reach the decision and the validity of the procedures with which those particular criteria are employed should be first and foremost when choosing assessment tools.

 
Choosing a published ‘Framework”  (criteria) as a resource for your choice or development of assessment tools.

Criterion-Referenced testing, CRT, is based on a framework of domain or ability level and has become an important aspect of language assessment.   When one wants to develop proficiency or achievement tests, CRT is the focused approach.  To develop a CRT one needs to explore not only the framework but also what kinds of alternate paradigms possible in Language testing situations.   One needs to understand what curriculum-related language testing.  (Hint: it is not teaching to the test, but teaching to the same criteria.) One needs to understand what and how to develop CRT items.  One needs to understand how basic descriptive are and how item statistics are conducted and interpreted.  Reliability, dependability, and unimensionality should be address.  How to make sure the CRT is valid and how CRT are administered.  How CRT feedback is given and reported.

The criteria or frameworks are:

• A structure for supporting or enclosing language component, essentially it is a skeletal support used as the basis for the construction of curriculum and assessment tools.
• A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality in language use.
• A fundamental structure, as for a written work.
• A set of assumptions, concepts, values, and practices that constitutes a way of viewing  language used in real situations.
  

Carrol (1961)

Using Framework for Teaching and Assessment.

In today’s world where countries, states, schools and communities have developed criteria for developing curriculum and testing it is vital to understand the purpose and how make use of the criteria.

CRT language tests CRT and the communicative language teaching methods, are created by using frameworks (criteria).  These tests and curricula cannot be developed in a vacuum but require research in language acquisition (Hansen and Stansfield 1981), language teaching practices (Morrow 1977, 1979), and general cognitive knowledge  (Patricia Johnson background knowledge and reading comprehension (1981, 1982), Pat Carrrell and Joan Eisterhold in reading comprehension(1983), Jack Richards- listening comprehension (1983), and Alice Omaggio (1986) in some of her chapters in “Teaching language in Context (1986).  The method for development requires careful construction that uses authentic materials and situations to simulate learning or testing environments.

This type of system requires responses that demonstrate comprehension in the production of responses.  It requires learners to demonstrate skills, production and processes.

 
Directly from:

http://www.pearsonlongman.com/teaching-tips/communication-method.html

What is Communicative Methodology?




'Communicative' is a word which has dominated discussions of teaching methodology for many years. Although in a monolingual English language classroom, 'real communication' in English is impossible, in 'communicative methodology' we try to be 'more communicative'. That is to say, even though it may be impossible to achieve 'real communication', we should attempt to get closer to 'real communication' in our classrooms.

What does it mean?


Communicative methodology includes a number of different (and perhaps interconnecting) principles.

The primary aim of foreign language learning is communication with users of the foreign language.

Students study the foreign language as a system of communication.

Students learn and practise the foreign language through 'communicative activities'.

 
Communication as primary aim


In the past the 'primary aim' of language learning seemed to be mastery of the grammatical system. The only practical task was translation and that was usually translation of 'great literature' rather than letters to the bank manager. The methodology for teaching modern, 'living' languages was identical to the methodology for dead, classical languages like Latin and Ancient Greek.

Today, we see our primary aim as teaching the practical use of English for communication with native speakers and others.


Learning English as a system of communication


Language contains many 'systems', one of which is the system of grammar. Mastery of grammar is still important but only as a means to successful communication. 


 
We are less concerned with the grammatical difference between these two questions than with their difference in meaning. We are less concerned with grammatical errors of form than with errors of meaning because these will lead to a breakdown in communication.

 
What are communicative activities?

In its purest form, a communicative activity is an activity in which there is:

• a desire to communicate
• a communicative purpose
• a focus on language content not language forms
• a variety of language used
• no teacher intervention
• no control or simplification of the material
  

Let's examine each characteristic in turn.



1. A desire to communicate.
In a communicative activity there must be a reason to communicate. When someone asks a question, the person must wish to get some information or some other form of result. There must be either an 'information gap' or an 'opinion gap' or some other reason to communicate.
2. A communicative purpose.
 When we ask students to describe their bedroom furniture to their partners, we are creating an artificial 'communicative purpose' and making the activity more artificial by asking them to do it in English. 
We also create artificial 'information gaps' by giving different information to pairs of students so that they can have a reason to exchange information.

3. A focus on language content not language forms.
In real life, we do not ask about our friend's family in order to practise 'have got' forms. We ask the question because we are interested in the information. That is to say, we are interested in the language content and not in the language forms.


4. A variety of language is used.
In normal communication, we do not repeatedly use the same language forms. In fact, we usually try to avoid repetition. In many classroom activities we often try to create situations in which students will repeatedly use a limited number of language patterns. This is also artificial.
5. No teacher intervention.
When you are buying a ticket for The Lion King at the theatre, your teacher is not usually beside you to 'help' or 'correct' your English. Teacher intervention in classroom communicative activities adds to the artificiality.


6. No control or simplification of the material. 
In the classroom, we often use graded or simplified materials as prompts for communicative activities. These will not be available in the real world.
   

 How can we make classroom 'communicative activities' less artificial?

As we have seen, there is no real possibility of real communication in English in a monolingual classroom. Learners must 'pretend' that they need to communicate in English. However, we can reduce the artificiality by looking at the features mentioned above. We can easily reduce teacher intervention, we can use more authentic materials, we can encourage a wider variety of language use, we can create more natural communicative purposes.

Games and puzzles make good contexts for communicative activities. The books of 'Communication Games' at different levels by Jill Hadfield (Longman) are good examples of successful 'communication' activities for the language classroom.

Recourses:

Pat Carrrell and Joan Eisterhold 1983. Schema theorty and ESL, reading pedagogy.  TESOL Quarterly 17 (4): 553-573

Brendan J. Carroll 1980.  Tesing communicative performance.  Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press Ltd.

Brown, James Dean and Hudson, Thom. 2002, Criterion-referenced Language Testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Council of Europe, 2001. Common European Framework of References for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press

Hansen and Stansfield 1981, The relationship of field dependent-independent cognitive styles to foreign language achievement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 196 275)

Johnston, patricia, 1981.  Effects on reading comprehension of language and cultural background of a test.  TESOL Quarterly 15 (2); 169-101.

Omaggio, Alice 1986,  Teaching language in context: Proficiency-oriented instruction.             Boston, Heinle & Heninle.

Richards, J. C. (1990), The language-teaching matrix. New Your; Cambridge.