teacher uses to assess the test. It could mean that the teacher has to work
out definite evaluation system and, moreover, should explain what she finds
important and worth evaluating and why. Usually the teachers design their
own system; often these are points that the students can obtain fulfilling
a certain task. Later the points are gathered and counted for the mark to
be put. Furthermore, the teacher can have a special table with points and
relevant marks. According to our knowledge, the language teachers decide on
the criteria together during a special meeting devoted to that topic, and
later they keep to it for the whole study year. Moreover, the teachers are
supposed to make his/her students acquainted with their evaluation system
for the students to be aware what they are expected to do.
3. Reliability
According to Bynom (Forum, 2001) reliability shows that the test’s
results will be similar and will not change if one and the same test will
be given on various days. The author of the paper is of the same mind with
Bynom and presumes the reliability to be the one of the key elements of a
good test in general. For, as it has been already discussed before, the
essence of reliability is that when the students’ scores for one and the
same test, though given at different periods of time and with a rather
extended interval, will be approximately the same. It will not only display
the idea that the test is well organized, but will denote that the students
have acquired the new material well.
A reliable test, according to Bynom, will contain well-formulated tasks
and not indefinite questions; the student will know what exactly should be
done. The test will always present ready examples at the beginning of each
task to clarify what should be done. The students will not be frustrated
and will know exactly what they are asked to perform. However, judging form
the personal experience, the author of the paper has to admit, that even
such hints may confuse the students; they may fail to understand the
requirements and, consequently, fail to complete the task correctly. This
could be explained by the fact that the students are very often
inattentive, lack patience and try to accomplish the test quickly without
bothering to double check it.
Further, regarding to Heaton (1990:13), who states that the test could be
unreliable if the two different markers mark it, we can add that this
factor should be accepted, as well. For example, one representative of
marking team could be rather lenient and have different demands and
requirements, but the other one could appear to be too strict and would pay
attention to any detail. Thus, we can come to another important factor
influencing the reliability that is marker’s comparison of examinees’
answers. Moreover, we have to admit a rather sad fact but not the
exceptional one that the maker’s personal attitude towards the testee could
impact his/her evaluation. No one has to exclude various home or health
problems the marker can encounter at that moment, as well.
To summarize, we can say that for a good test possessing validity and
reliability is not enough. The test should be practical, or in other words,
efficient. It should be easily understood by the examinee, ease scored and
administered, and, certainly, rather cheap. It should not last for
eternity, for both examiner and examinee could become tired during five
hours non-stop testing process. Moreover, testing the students the teachers
should be aware of the fact that together with checking their knowledge the
test can influence the students negatively. Therefore, the teachers ought
to design such a test that it could encourage the students, but not to make
them reassure in their own abilities. The test should be a friend, not an
enemy. Thus, the issue of validity and reliability is very essential in
creating a good test. The test should measure what it is supposed to
measure, but not the knowledge beyond the students’ abilities. Moreover,
the test will be a true indicator whether the learning process and the
teacher’s work is effective.
Chapter 3
Types of tests
Different scholars (Alderson, 1996; Heaton, 1990; Underhill, 1991) in
their researches ask the similar question – why test, do the teachers
really need them and for what purpose. Further, they all agree that test is
not the teacher’s desire to catch the students unprepared with what they
are not acquainted; it is also not the motivating factor for the students
to study. In fact, the test is a request for information and possibility to
learn what the teachers did not know about their students before. We can
add here that the test is important for the students, too, though they are
unaware of that. The test is supposed to display not only the students’
weak points, but also their strong sides. It could act as an indicator of
progress the student is gradually making learning the language. Moreover,
we can cite the idea of Hughes (1989:5) who emphasises that we can check
the progress, general or specific knowledge of the students, etc. This
claim will directly lead us to the statement that for each of these
purposes there is a special type of testing. According to some scholars
(Thompson, 2001; Hughes, 1989; Alderson, 1996; Heaton, 1990; Underhill,
1991), there are four traditional categories or types of tests: proficiency
tests, achievement tests, diagnostic tests, and placement tests. The author
of the paper, once being a teacher, can claim that she is acquainted with
three of them and has frequently used them in her teaching practice.
In the following sub-chapters we are determined to discuss different
types of tests and if possible to apply our own experience in using them.
3.1. Diagnostic tests
It is wise to start our discussion with that type of testing, for it
is typically the first step each teacher, even non-language teacher, takes
at the beginning of a new school year. In the establishment the author of
the paper was working it was one of the main rules to start a new study
year giving the students a diagnostic test. Every year the administration
of the school had stemmed a special plan where every teacher was supposed
to write when and how they were going to test their students. Moreover, the
teachers were supposed to analyse the diagnostic tests, complete special
documents and provide diagrams with the results of each class or group if a
class was divided. Then, at the end of the study year the teachers were
demanded to compare the results of them with the final, achievement test
(see in Appendix 1). The author of the paper has used this type of test for
several times, but had never gone deep into details how it is constructed,
why and what for. Therefore, the facts listed below were of great value for
her.
Referring to Longman Dictionary of LTAL (106) diagnostic tests is a
test that is meant to display what the student knows and what s/he does not
know. The dictionary gives an example of testing the learners’
pronunciation of English sounds. Moreover, the test can check the students’
knowledge before starting a particular course. Hughes (1989:6) adds that
diagnostic tests are supposed to spot the students’ weak and strong points.
Heaton (1990:13) compares such type of test with a diagnosis of a patient,
and the teacher with a doctor who states the diagnosis. Underhill
(1991:14.) adds that a diagnostic test provides the student with a variety
of language elements, which will help the teacher to determine what the
student knows or does not know. We believe that the teacher will
intentionally include the material that either is presumed to be taught by
a syllabus or could be a starting point for a course without the knowledge
of which the further work is not possible. Thus, we fully agree with the
Heaton’s comparison where he contrasts the test with a patient’s diagnosis.
The diagnostic test displays the teacher a situation of the students’
current knowledge. This is very essential especially when the students
return from their summer holidays (that produces a rather substantial gap
in their knowledge) or if the students start a new course and the teacher
is completely unfamiliar with the level of the group. Hence, the teacher
has to consider carefully about the items s/he is interested in to teach.
This consideration reflects Heaton’s proposal (ibid.), which stipulates
that the teachers should be systematic to design the tasks that are
supposed to illustrate the students’ abilities, and they should know what
exactly they are testing. Moreover, Underhill (ibid.) points out that apart
from the above-mentioned the most essential element of the diagnostic test
is that the students should not feel depressed when the test is completed.
Therefore, very often the teachers do not put any marks for the diagnostic
test and sometimes even do not show the test to the learners if the
students do not ask the teacher to return it. Nevertheless, regarding our
own experience, the learners, especially the young ones, are eager to know
their results and even demand marks for their work. Notwithstanding, it is
up to the teacher whether to inform his/her students with the results or
not; however, the test represents a valuable information mostly for the
teacher and his/her plans for designing a syllabus.
Returning to Hughes (ibid.) we can emphasise his belief that this
type of test is very useful for individual check. It means that this test
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
