Table 2 Time frame and the units
Table 3 The key points of those 8 units
Table 4 The specification grids of the test
Table 5 Frequency distribution in the final achievement test
Table 6 The standard derivations of 5 scales in the test
Table 7 The interpretation of the item difficulty of the test
Table 8 The result of item discrimination of the test
Table 9 The coefficient alphas of the 5 scales in the test
FIGURES
Figure 3.3.4.1 Histogram of score distribution
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Declaration i
Acknowledgement ii
Abstract iii
List of abbreviation iv
List of tables and figures v
Tables of contents vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Rationale 1
1.2 Scope of the study 3
5
1.3 Aims of the study 3
1.4 Methods of the study 4
1.5 Research questions 4
1.6 Design of the study 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Basic concepts of testing 5
2.2 Types of tests 5
2.2.1 Proficiency tests 5
2.2.2 Achievement tests. 6
2.2.3 Diagnostic tests 8
2.2.4 Placement tests 8
2.2.5 Progress tests 8
2.2.6 Direct versus indirect tests 9
2.2.7 Discrete point verse integrative testing 10
2.2.8 Norm – referenced versus criterion – referenced testing 11
2.2.9 Objective testing versus subjective testing 11
2.2.10 Communicative language testing 12
2.3 Characteristics of a good test 13
2.3.1 Validity 13
2.3.1.1 Construct validity 13
2.3.1.2 Content validity 13
2.3.1.3 Face validity 14
2.3.1.4 Backwash validity 14
2.3.1.5 Criterion-related validity 15
2.3.2 Reliability. 15
2.3.3 Discrimination 15
2.3.4 Practicability.
16
6
2.4 Test items for reading skill, writing skill, grammar, and vocabulary 17
2.4.1 Test items 17
2.4.2 Language components and language skills. 17
2.4.3 The test item types used to evaluate languages components and language
skills. 18
CHAPTER 3: THE STUDY 19
3.1 The subjects and the current English teaching, learning and testing
situations at STTC 19
3.1.1 Students and their backgrounds 19
3.1.2 The English teaching staff 19
3.1.3 English teaching and learning at STTC 20
3.1.4 The objectives of the elementary English course 21
3.1.5 Teaching material used for first-year students at STTC 22
3.2 The current testing situation at STTC 24
3.3 The proposed construction of the achievement test for the first year
students at STTC 25
3.3.1 Test objectives 25
3.3.2 The Paper Specification Grids for the 2
nd
Term Achievement Test 25
3.3.3 Data collection 26
3.3.4 Interpretation and test score analysis: 27
3.3.4.1 The frequency distribution 27
3.3.4.2 The central tendency 27
3.3.4.3 The dispersion 28
3.3.5 Test items evaluation 28
3.3.5.1 The item difficulty 28
3.3.5.2 The item discrimination 30
3.3.6 Estimating the reliability of the test 32
3.4 Teachers’ and students’ comments 32
CHAPTER 4: CONCLUSION 34
4.1 Summary of the study 34
4.2 Limitation 34
4.3 Suggestion for further study 35
REFERENCES -1-
APPENDICES -3-
Appendix 1: The Sample of The 2
nd
term Achievement Test -3-
Appendix 2: The result of test analysis using ITEMAN software
-8-
7
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 RATIONALE
The importance of language testing is recognized by virtually all professionals in the field of
language education. It is of special importance in educational system that is highly competitive as
testing is not only an indirect stimulus to learning, but also plays a crucial role in determining the
success or failure of an individual's career with direct implications for his future earning power.
"Thus, testing is an important tool in educational research and for programme evaluation, and may
even throw light on both the nature of language proficiency and language learning"(Lauwerys and
Seanlon, 1969).
Likewise, in the teaching and learning foreign language process, testing takes a very important role.
Language testing is one of the most important ways to evaluate how students acquire when
they learn a foreign language. Through tests teachers know not only the success or failure
of learners but also how well the learners use what they have been taught. Moreover, the
learners know what they gain, what they can apply, and what they cannot. Moore (1992,
p.138) states: “Evaluation is an essential tool for teachers because it gives them feedback concerning
what the students have learned and indicates what should be done next in the learning process.
Evaluation helps you to better understand students, their abilities, interests, attitudes and needs in order
to better teach and motivate them.” Nga (1997, p.1) reaches the same conclusion: “Tests are assumed to
be powerful determiners-of what happens in classroom and it is commonly claimed that they affect
teaching and learning activities both directly and indirectly.”
Therefore, testing is an important part of the teaching and learning process; but has it been given
adequate attention and careful study yet? Test researchers (Hughes, 1989; Brown, 1995;
Read, 1982; Hai, 1999; Tuyet, 1999) in general claim that unfortunately tests have got a
bad rap in recent years and not without reason. More often than not, tests are seen by
learners
“
as dark clouds hanging over their heads, upsetting them with thunderous anxiety
as they anticipate the lightning bolts of questions they do not know and worst of all a flood
of disappointment if they do not make the grade” (Brown, 1994a: p.373). Hughes (1989,
p.1) makes another comment on recent language testing: “It cannot be denied that a great
deal of language testing is of very poor quality. Too often language tests have a harmful
effect on teaching and learning and too often they fail to measure accurately whatevaer it is
8
they are intended to measure.” This coupled with the fact that teachers frequently lack
formal training in educational measurement techniques and they tend to be alienated from
the testing process. They regard it as a necessary evil, an intrusion on their regular
instructional activities.
At present, English tests at Son La Teachers’ Training College (STTC) have the following
characteristics:
- It has not been given appropriate attention and careful study
- Its role in teaching and learning has not been fully recognized.
- Almost language teachers think that teachers should be responsible for making tests
because testing is one part of teaching and learning activities that students have to pass.
- There has been a tendency using commercial (ready-made) tests rather than teacher self-
made tests since commercial tests are very convenient and do not take much time to
construct. Thus these selected tests may not be relevant to the objectives of the course.
- Test content is sometimes found to be unrelated to the objectives of the course and very
often many test items in some tests have not been dealt with classes.
- Students have complained that there is still a big gap between what is taught and what is
tested. An instance for this would be the case when some tests designed for pre-
intermediate level are given to students of elementary level. They are so difficult that only
few students can accomplish. Therefore, such tests are not valid and reliable.
- Using tests exclusively for grading, there is no feedback about the tests.
- There has been no discarding of bad tests or bad items. Some items are found to be so
difficult that few testees could do whereas there are test items, which are so easy that all
testees can obtain the correct answers. Such items should be discarded or replaced.
- Moreover, due to the fact that the writing and reading comprehension tests at the
university are totally designed with multiple choice techniques so students can easily cheat
by asking and copying answers from their classmates.
- Apart from those carefully designed tests, some others are still of low and poor quality
and these do not accurately measure the students' real ability. Perhaps the test writer only
pays attention to the fulfillment of his/her duty, which is to give tests, rather than to the
effectiveness of the tests. Those tests often fail to measure accurately whatever they are
intended to measure.
9
- Finally, the last testing problem at STTC is that some of the tests may lack reliability
because they are not pre-tested anywhere else for the sake of confidentiality. Truly, for the
sake of "confidentiality" test designers are often informed to write tests at short notice, just
some time before it is administered. In such circumstances who can say for sure that the
required standards, criteria will be met by the test writers?
Therefore, a well-design test is necessary for every language level especially for college
level since it is the elementary level, which aims at acquiring survival English and
diagnosing students’ aptitudes in the course and what they have to study to improve both
their knowledge and skills. In this minor thesis, the author bases herself on the knowledge
of testing and testing situation to propose a sample achievement test for the first year
students who have been taught the student’s book New Headway English Course
(elementary level) from unit 1 to unit 8.
1.2 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The scope of the study focuses on the existing situations at Son La Teacher’s Training
College. I design a sample test only on writing and reading skills focusing on grammar,
vocabulary, reading and writing skills. The study provides investigated and analyzed data
of the achievement test for the first-year non-English major students. Moreover, the
teachers’ and students’ comments on the test and their suggestion for its improvement will
be presented in this thesis.
1.3 AIMS OF THE STUDY
The aim of the study is to report a research examining the current testing situations and
language tests for non-English majors at STTC with great emphasis on analyzing the result
of the sample test, the teachers’ and students’ comments on the test and their suggestion for
its improvement. The specific aims of the study are:
1. To investigate the STTC teachers’ evaluation and students’ evaluation of the
sample test concerning its content, time allowance and its format.
2. To investigate the teachers’ suggestions and students’ suggestions for improving
testing situations and language tests at STTC.
10
3. To propose an achievement test construction for the first-year students at STTC
and a sample test will be designed based on the proposed test construction.
4. To offer some practical recommendations for improving of testing situation at STTC.
1.4 METHODS OF THE STUDY
In order to achieve the above aims, a study has been carried out with the following
approach. Basing on the theory and principle of language testing, major characteristics of a
good test, especially achievement tests, the author analyzes the results of the sample test,
and the survey questionnaire done on 10 English teachers of the English major students at
STTC. Many other methods, such as interviews, informal discussion with students,
teachers, and classroom testing observation are also employed to get more needed
information.
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The research questions of the study are as follows:
1. What should be done to improve the English testing situation for the first-year
students at STTC?
2. Which test components are considered appropriate for the English Achievement
test construction at STTC?
1.6 DESIGN OF THE STUDY
The minor thesis is organized into four chapters
Chapter one is the introduction consisting of the rationale, the aims, the method, the
research questions and the design of the study.
Chapter two presents the literature review on the basic concepts of testing, types of tests
and characteristics of good tests, the test items, test item types of language components and
language skills.
Chapter three, which is the main part of the study, shows the analysis of the finding of test
designing and some brief comments from teachers and testees.
Chapter four deals with some suggestions to improve the test and the summary of the
research.
11
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 BASIC CONCEPTS OF TESTING
According to Brown (1994: p.252), “A test, in plain or ordinary words, is a method of
measuring a person’s ability or knowledge in a given area.” Moore (1992: p.138) proposes
that evaluation is an essential tool for teachers because it gives them feedback concerning
what the students have learned and indicates what should be done next in the learning
process. Evaluation helps us to understand students better, their abilities, interests,
attitudes, and needs in order to better teach and motivate them. However, in the book of
Brown (1994, p.373) he stresses that tests are seen by learners as dark clouds hanging over
their heads, upsetting them with thunderous anxiety as they anticipate the lightning bolts of
questions they do not know and worst of all a flood of disappointed if they do not make the
grade. Read (1983, p.3) shares the idea saying a language test is a sample of linguistic
performance or a demonstration of language proficiency. In other words, a test is not
simply a set of items that can be objectively marked; it can also involve a ‘subject’
educational of spoken and written performance with the assistance of a checklist, a rating
scale, or a set of performance criteria.” Nga (1992, p.2) also confirms that tests commonly
refer to a set of items or questions designed to be presented to one or more students under
specified conditions. Harrions (1986, p.1) notices that a natural extension of classroom
work, providing teachers and students with useful information that can serve as a basis for
improvement and a test is necessary but unpleasant imposition from outside the classroom.
That means test is a useful tool to measure learners’ ability in a certain situation especially
in classroom.
2.2 TYPES OF TESTS
2.2.1 Proficiency Tests
According to Hughes (1990:9), “Proficiency tests are designed to measure people’s ability
in a language regardless of any training they may have had in that language.” That is to say
the content of a proficiency test is not based on the content or objectives of any language
12
course test takers may have followed. It is rather based on a specification of what they
have to be able to do in the language to meet the requirement of their future aims.
Other test specialists, such as Carroll and Hall (1985), Harrison (1986) and Henning (1987)
share the same view that proficiency test helps both teachers and learners know whether
the learners can be able to follow a particular course or they have to take some pre-
departure training to some other popular tests such as TOEFL, IELTS, which are used to
test students’ proficiency for their study in some English speaking countries. In Vietnam
proficiency tests are of different levels namely A, B, C for workers, engineers, teachers,
architects, etc.
2.2.2 Achievement Tests
As it has been mentioned above, not many teachers are interested in proficiency tests since
it does not base on any particular course book. (Hughes, 1990:10) states: “In contrast to
proficiency tests, achievement tests are directly related to language courses, their purpose
being to establish how successful individual students, groups of students, or the courses
themselves have been in achieving objectives”. Achievement tests are usually carried out
after a course on a group of learners who take the course. Sharing the idea about
achievement tests with Hughes, Brown (1994:259) suggests: “An achievement test is
related directly to classroom lessons, units or even total curriculum”. Achievement tests, in
his opinion, “are limited to a particular material covered in a curriculum within a particular
time frame.” Another useful comment on achievement tests offered by Finocchiaro and
Sako (1983:15) is that achievement types or attainment tests are widely employed in any
language teaching institutions. They are used to measure the amount of degree of control
of discrete language and cultural items and of integrated language skills acquired by the
students within a specific period of instruction in a specific course”. In his book, Harrison
(1983:7) shows: “an achievement test looks back over a longer period of learning than the
diagnostic test, for example, a year’s work, or even a variety of different courses.” He also
points out that achievement tests are intended to show the standard, which the students
have reached in relation to other students at the same level.
There are two kinds of achievement tests: final achievement tests and progress
achievement tests.
13
Final achievement tests are those administered at the end of a course of study. They may
be written and administered by ministries of education, official examining boards, or by
members of teaching institutions. Clearly, the content of these tests must be related to the
courses with which they are concerned, but the nature of this relationship is still a matter of
disagreement amongst language testers.
According to some testing experts, the content of a final achievement test should be based
directly on a detailed course syllabus or on the books and other material used. This has
been referred to as the syllabus–content approach. It has an obvious appearance, since the
test only contains what it is thought that the students have actually encountered, and thus
can be considered, in this respect at least, a fair test. The disadvantage of this type is that if
the syllabus is badly designed, or the books and other materials are badly chosen, then the
results of a test can be very misleading. Successful performance on the test may not truly
indicate successful achievement of course objectives.
The alternative approach is to design the test content directly on the objectives of the
course, which has a number of advantages. Firstly, it forces designers to elicit course
objectives. Secondly, test takers show how far they have achieved those objectives. This in
turn puts pressure on those who are responsible for the syllabus and for the selection of
books and materials to ensure that these are consistent with the course objectives. Tests
based on course objectives work against the perpetuation of poor teaching practice, a kind
of course–content–based test, almost as if part of a conspiracy fails to do. It is the author’s
belief that test content based on course objectives is much preferable, which provides more
accurate information about individual and group achievement, and is likely to promote a
more beneficial backwash effect on teaching.
Progress achievement tests, as the name suggests, are intended to measure the progress that
learners are making. Since ‘progress’ in achieving course objectives, these tests should be
related to objectives. These should make a clear progression towards the final achievement
test based on course objectives. Then if the syllabus and teaching methods are appropriate
to these objectives, progress tests based on short – term objectives will fit well with what has
been taught. If not, there will be pressure to create a better fit. If it is the syllabus that is at fault, it
is the tester’s responsibility to make clear that it is there, that change is needed, not in the tests.
14
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét