extremely crucial for the students, for they are intended either to make
the students pass or fail the test.
At this instant the author of the paper is determined to compare a
progress and achievement test. Again if we look at these two types they
might seem similar, however, it is not so. Drawing on the facts listed
above (see sub-chapter 2.3) we can report that a progress test is typically
used during the course to check the acquisition of an excerpted material.
An achievement test checks the acquisition of the material, as well.
Although, it is far different in its application time. We basically use an
achievement test at the end of the course to check the acquisition of the
material covered during the study year, not bits of it as it is with a
progress test.
Quoting Hughes (ibid.) we can differentiate between two kinds of
achievement tests: final and progress tests. Final tests are the tests that
are usually given at the end of the course in order to check the students’
achieved results and whether the objectives set at the beginning have been
successfully reached. Further Hughes highlights that ministries of
education, official examining boards, school administration and even the
teachers themselves design these tests. The tests are based on the
curriculum and the course that has been studied. We assume, that is a well-
known fact that teachers usually are responsible for composing such tests,
and it requires a careful work.
Alternatively, Alderson (ibid.) mentions two usage types of
achievement tests: formative and summative. The notion of a formative test
denotes the idea that the teacher will be able after evaluating the results
of the test reconsider his/her teaching, syllabus design and even slow down
the pace of studying to consolidate the material if it is necessary in
future. Notwithstanding, these reconsiderations will not affect the present
students who have taken the test. They will be applied to the future
syllabus design.
Summative usage will deal precisely with the students’ success or
failure. The teacher will immediately can take up remedial activities to
improve a situation.
Further, Alderson (ibid.) and Heaton (1990:14) stipulate that
designing an achievement test is rather time-consuming, for the achievement
test is basically devised to cover a broad topic of the material covered
during the course. In addition, one and the same achievement test could be
given to more than one class at school to check both the students’ progress
and the teachers’ work. At that point it is very essential to consider the
material covered by different classes or groups. You cannot ask the
students what they have not been taught. Heaton (ibid.) emphasises the
close cooperative work of the teachers as a crucial element in test design.
However, in the school the author of the paper used to work the teachers
did not cooperate in designing achievement tests. Each teacher was free to
write the test that best suits his/her children.
Developing the topic, we can focus on Hughes’ idea that there is an
approach how to design a test; it is called syllabus-content approach. The
test is based on a syllabus studied or a book taken during the course. This
test could be described as a fair test, for it focuses mainly on the
detailed material that the students are supposed to have studied. Hughes
(ibid.) points out that if the test is inappropriately designed, it could
result in unsuccessful accomplishment of it. Sometimes the demands of the
test may differ from the objectives of the course. Therefore, the test
should be based directly on the objectives of the course. Consequently, it
will influence the choice of books appropriate to the syllable and syllable
itself. The backwash will be positive not only for the test, but also for
the teaching. Furthermore, we should mention that the students have to know
the criteria according to which they are going to be evaluated.
To conclude we shall state again that achievement tests are meant to
check the mastery of the material covered by the learners. They will be
great helpers for the teacher’s future work and will contribute a lot to
the students’ progress.
3.5 Proficiency tests
The last type of test to be discussed is a proficiency test. Regarding
Longman Dictionary of LTAL (292) proficiency test is a test, which measures
how much of a language a person knows or has learnt. It is not bound to any
curriculum or syllabus, but is intended to check the learners’ language
competence. Although, some preparation and administration was done before
taking the test, the test’s results are what being focused on. The examples
of such tests could be the American Testing of English as Foreign Language
test (further in the text TOEFL) that is used to measures the learners’
general knowledge of English in order to allow them to enter any high
educational establishments or to take up a job in the USA. Another
proficiency test is Cambridge First Certificate test that has almost the
same aim as TOEFL.
Hughes (1989:10) gives the similar definition of proficiency tests
stressing that training is not the thing that is emphasised, but the
language. He adds that ‘proficient’ in the case of proficiency tests means
possessing a certain ability of using the language according to an
appropriate purpose. It denotes that the learner’s language ability could
be tested in various fields or subjects (art, science, medicine, etc.) in
order to check whether the learner could suit the demands of a specific
field or not. This could refer to TOEFL tests. Apart from TOEFL we can
speak about Cambridge First Certificate test, which is general and does not
concern any specific field. The aim of this test is to reveal whether the
learners’ language abilities have reached a certain standard set. The test
could be taken by anyone who is interested in testing the level of language
knowledge. There are special tests levels, which can be chosen by a
candidate. If a candidate has passed the exam s/he can take another one of
a different level. However, these entire tests are not free of charge, and
in order to take it an individual has to pay for them.
Regarding Hughes (ibid.) who supposes that the only similar factor
about such tests that they are not based on any courses, but are intended
to measure the candidates’ suitability for a certain post or course at the
university, we can add that in order to pass these tests a candidate has to
attend special preparatory courses.
Moreover, Hughes (ibid.) believes that the proficiency tests affect
learners’ more in negative way, than in positive one.
The author of the paper both agrees and does not agree with the
Hughes’ proposed statement. Definitely, this test could make the testee
depressed and exhausted by taking a rather long test. Moreover, the
proficiency tests are rather impartial; they are not testee-friendly.
However, there is a useful factor amongst the negative ones. It is
preparation to proficiency tests, for it involves all language material
starting from grammar finishing with listening comprehension. All four
skills are being practised during the preparation course; various reading
task and activities have been incorporated; writing has been stressed
focusing on all possible types of essays, letters, reviews, etc. Speaking
has been practiced as well. The whole material has been consolidated for
many times.
To summarize we can claim that there are different types of tests that
serve for different purposes. Moreover, they all are necessary for the
teacher’s work, for them, apart from a proficiency test, could contribute
to successful material acquisition by learners.
Chapter 4
Ways of testing
In this chapter we will attempt to discuss various types of testing
and if possible compare them. We will start with the most general ones and
move to more specific and detailed ways of testing.
4.1 Direct and indirect testing
The first types of testing we are intended to discuss are direct and
indirect testing. First, we will try to define each of them; secondly, we
will endeavour to compare them.
We will commence our discussion with direct testing that according to
Hughes (1989:14) means the involvement of a skill that is supposed to be
tested. The following view means that when applying the direct testing the
teacher will be interested in testing a particular skill, e.g. if the aim
of the test is to check listening comprehension, the students will be given
a test that will check their listening skills, such as listening to the
tape and doing the accompanying tasks. Such type of test will not engage
testing of other skills. Hughes (ibid.) emphasises the importance of using
authentic materials. Though, we stipulate that the teacher is free to
decide him/herself what kind of material the students should be provided
with. It the teacher’s aim is to teach the students to comprehend the real,
native speech, s/he will apply the authentic material in teaching and
later, logically, in tests. Developing the idea we can cite Bynom (2001:8)
who assumes that direct testing introduces real-life language through
authentic tasks. Consequently, it will lead to the usage of role-plays,
summarising the general idea, providing the missing information, etc.
Moving further and analysing the statements made by the linguists (Bynom,
2001; Hughes,1989) we can posit the idea that direct testing will be task-
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
