preparation time before a test.
Thompson (ibid.) quotes Eggan, who emphasises the idea that the
learners study hard for the classes they are tested thoroughly. Further, he
cites Hilles, who considers that the students want and expect to be tested.
Nonetheless, this statement has been rather generalized. Speaking about the
students at school, we can declare that there is hardly a student who will
truly enjoy tests and their procedure. Usually, what we will see just sore
faces when a test is being mentioned. According to Thompson, the above-
mentioned idea could be applied to the students who want to pass their
final exams or to get a certificate in Test of English as a Foreign
Language (TOEFL) or First Certificate (FCE). Mostly this concerns adults or
the students who have their own special needs, such as going abroad to
study or work. This again supports the idea that motivation factor plays a
significant role in the learning process.
Moreover, too much of testing could be disastrous. It can entirely
change the students’ attitude towards learning the language, especially if
the results are usually dissatisfying and decrease their motivation towards
learning and the subject in general.
Furthermore, as Alderson (1996:212) assumes, we should not forget that
the tests when administered receive less support from the teacher as it is
usually during the exercises in a usual language classroom. The students
have to cope themselves; they cannot rely on the help of the teacher if
they are in doubt. During a usual procedure when doing various activities
the students know they can encounter the teacher’s help if they require it.
They know the teacher is always near and ready to assist, therefore, no one
is afraid to make a mistake and try to take a chance to do the exercises.
However, when writing a test and being left alone to deal with the test
activities, the students panic and forget everything they knew before. The
author of the paper believes that first what the teacher should do is to
teach the students to overcome their fear of tests and secondly, help them
acquire the ability to work independently believing in their own knowledge.
That ability according to Alderson is the main point, “the core meaning” of
the test. The students should be given confidence. Here we can refer to
Heaton (1990:7) who conceives, supported by Hicks, that students’
encouragement is a vital element in language learning. Another question
that may emerge here is how to reach the goal described above, how to
encourage the students. Thus, at this point we can speak about positive
results. In fact, our success motivates us to study further, encourages us
to proceed even if it is rather difficult and we are about to lose
confidence in ourselves. Therefore, we can speak about the tests as a tool
to increase motivation. However, having failed for considerable number of
times, the student would definitely oppose the previous statement. Hence,
we can speak about assessment and evaluation as means for increasing the
students’ motivation.
Concerning Hicks (2000:162), we often perceive these two terms –
evaluating and assessment – as two similar notions, though they are
entirely different. She states that when we assess our students we commonly
are interested in “how and how much our students have learnt”, but when we
evaluate them we are concerned with “how the learning process is
developing”. These both aspects are of great importance for the teacher and
the students and should be correlated in order to make evaluation and
assessment “go hand in hand”. However, very frequently, the teachers assess
the students without taking the aspect of evaluation into account.
According to Hicks, this assessment is typically applied when dealing with
examinations that take place either at the end of the course or school
year. Such assessment is known as achievement test. With the help of these
tests the teacher receives a clear picture of what his/her students have
learnt and which level they are comparing with the rest of the class. The
author of the paper agrees that achievement tests are very essential for
comparing how the students’ knowledge has changed during the course. This
could be of a great interest not only for the teacher, but also for the
authorities of the educational establishment the teacher is employed by.
Thus, evaluation of the learning process is not of the major importance
here. We can speak about evaluation when we deal with “small” tests the
teachers use during the course or studying year. It is a well-known fact
that these tests are employed in order to check how the learning process is
going on, where the students are, what difficulties they encounter and what
they are good at. These tests are also called “diagnostic” tests; they
could be of a great help for the teacher: judging from the results of the
test, analysing them the teacher will be able to improve or alter the
course and even introduce various innovations. These tests will define
whether the teacher can proceed with the new material or has to stop and
return to what has not been learnt sufficiently in order to implement
additional practice.
With respect to Hicks, we can display some of her useful and practical
ideas she proposes for the teachers to use in the classroom. In order to
incorporate evaluation together with assessment she suggests involving the
students directly into the process of testing. Before testing vocabulary
the teacher can ask the students to guess what kind of activities could be
applied in the test. The author of the paper believes that it will give
them an opportunity to visage how they are going to be tested, to be aware
of and wait for, and the most important, it will reduce fear the students
might face. Moreover, at the end of each test the students could be asked
their reflections: if there was a multiple choice, what helped them guess
correctly, what they used for that – their schemata or just pure guessing;
if there was a cloze test - did they use guessing from the context or some
other skills, etc. Furthermore, Hicks emphasises that such analysis will
display the students the way they are tested and establish an appropriate
test for each student. Likewise, evaluation will benefit the teacher as
well. S/he not only will be able to discover the students’ preferences, but
also find out why the students have failed a particular type of activity or
even the whole test. The evaluation will determine what is really wrong
with the structure or design of the test itself. Finally, the students
should be taught to evaluate the results of the test. They should be asked
to spot the places they have failed and together with the teacher attempt
to find out what has particularly caused the difficulties. This will lead
to consolidation of the material and may be even to comprehension of it.
And again the teacher’s role is very essential, for the students alone are
not able to cope with their mistakes. Thus, evaluation is inevitable
element of assessment if the teacher’s aim is to design a test that will
not make the students fail, but on the contrary, anticipate the test’s
results.
To conclude we can add alluding to Alderson (1996:212) that the usual
classroom test should not be too complicated and should not discriminate
between the levels of the students. The test should test what was taught.
The author of the paper has the same opinion, for the students are very
different and the level of their knowledge is different either. It is
inappropriate to design a test of advanced level if among your learners
there are those whose level hardly exceeds lower intermediate.
Above all, the tests should take the learners’ ability to work and
think into account, for each student has his/her own pace, and some
students may fail just because they have not managed to accomplish the
required tasks in time.
Furthermore, Alderson assumes (ibid.) that the instructions of the
test should be unambiguous. The students should clearly see what they are
supposed and asked to do and not to be frustrated during the test.
Otherwise, they will spend more time on asking the teacher to explain what
they are supposed to do, but not on the completing of the tasks themselves.
Finally, according to Heaton (1990:10) and Alderson (1996:214), the teacher
should not give the tasks studied in the classroom for the test. They
explain it by the fact, that when testing we need to learn about the
students’ progress, but not to check what they remember. The author of the
paper concurs the idea and assumes that the one of the aims of the test is
to check whether the students are able to apply their knowledge in various
contexts. If this happens, that means they have acquired the new material.
Chapter 2
Reliability and validity
1. Inaccurate tests
Hughes (1989:2) conceives that one of the reasons why the tests are not
favoured is that they measure not exactly what they have to measure. The
author of the paper supports the idea that it is impossible to evaluate
someone’s true abilities by tests. An individual might be a bright student
possessing a good knowledge of English, but, unfortunately, due to his/her
nervousness may fail the test, or vice versa, the student might have
crammed the tested material without a full comprehension of it. As a
result, during the test s/he is just capable of producing what has been
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
