The nittygritty of language testing

The nittygritty of language testing

• 1.
  THE NITTYGRITTY OF LANGUAGETESTING: IMPLICATIONS FOR TEST CONSTRUCTORS MS. MARIA ZAHEER PRINCE SULTAN UNIVERSITY KSAALT Mini Conference 2015
• 2.
  • What arethe principles of language testing? • How can we define them? • What factors can influence them? • How can we measure them? Objectives
• 4.
  What is atest? ‘A method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or performance in a given domain’(Brown,2004:3). Method Measure Ability Performance /competence
• 5.
  Teaching Assessments Test Adapted from Brown, 2004:5 Assessmentis one component of teaching  Assessment helps teachers to gain information about every aspects of their students especially their achievement. An aspect that plays crucial role in assessment is tests.
• 6.
  A good testis constructed by considering the principles of language Testing Validity Reliability PracticalityAuthenticity Wash bacK
• 7.
  Validity is theextent, to which it exactly measures what it is supposed to measure (Hughes, 2003:26). Construct Validity Content Validity Consequent ial Validity Criterion validity Face validity
• 8.
  what is meant tobe measured has to be crystal clear. The correlation between the contents of the test and the language skills, structures Content Validity The test items should really represent the course objective. http://www.slideshare.net/Samcruz5/validit y-reliability-practicality?next_slideshow=1
• 9.
  the relationship between the test score andthe outcome. The test score should really represent the criterion that is intended to measure in the test Criterion Validity
• 10.
  Criterion validity canbe established through two ways. Concurrent Validity A test is said to have concurrent validity if its result is supported by other concurrent performance beyond the assessment itself (Brown, 2004:24). Predictive Validity The predictive validity tends to assess and predict a student’s possible future success (Alderson et al.,1995:180-183).
• 11.
  Construct Validity Construct validityrefers to concepts or theories which are underlying the usage of certain ability including language ability. Construct validity shows that the result of the test really represents the same construct with the ability of the students which is being measured (Djiwandono, 1996:96). Consequential Validity Consequential validity to refer to the social consequences of using a particular test for a particular purpose.  The use of a test is said to have consequential validity to the extent that society benefits from that use of the test.
• 12.
  Face Validity  Atest is said to have face validity if it looks to other testers, teachers, moderators, and students as if it measures what it is supposed to measure (Heaton, 1990:159). The test can be judged to have face validity by simply look at the items of the test. face validity can affect students in doing the test (Brown, 2004:27 & Heaton, 1988:160
• 13.
  To overcome this,the test constructor has to consider these: Students will be more confident if they face a well- constructed, expected format with familiar tasks. Students will be less anxious if the test is clearly doable within the allotted time limit.  Students will be optimistic if the items are clear and uncomplicated (simple).  Students will find it easy to do the test if the directions are very clear. Students will be less worried if the tasks are related to their course work (content validity). Students will be at ease if the difficulty level presents a
• 14.
  Reliability Reliability refers tothe consistency of the scores obtained (Gronlund, 1977:138). Reliability actually does not really deal with the test itself. It deals with the results of the test. The test results should be consistent.
• 15.
  Reliability falls Into 4 kinds Student-Related Reliability Test Administration Reliability Test Reliability RaterReliability (Taken from Brown, 2004:21-22).
• 16.
  Test Administration Reliability The conditionand situation in which the test is administered. Student-Related Reliability This kind of reliability refers to temporary illness, fatigue, a bad day, anxiety and other physical or psychological factors of the students. Thus, the score obtained of the student maybe not his/her actual score. Test Reliability The test fits into the time constraints. The items of the test should be crystal clear that it will not end with ambiguity.
• 17.
  Rater Reliability This kindof reliability fall into two categories. They are: 1. Inter-rater reliability It occurs when two or more scorers yield inconsistent scores of the same test, possibility for lack of attention to scoring criteria, inexperience, inattention, or even biases. 2.Intra-rater reliability It is a common occurrence for classroom teacher because of unclear scoring criteria, fatigue, and bias toward particular “good” or “bad” students or simple carelessness.
• 18.
  Practicality The relationship betweenavailable resources for the test, i.e. human resources, material resources, time, etc. and resources which will be required in the design, development, and use of the test (Bachman & Palmer, 1996:35-36).
• 19.
  Brown (2004:19) definespracticality is in terms of: 1) Cost -The test should not be too expensive to conduct 2) Time- The test should stay within appropriate time constraints. 3) Administration- The test should not be too complicated or complex to conduct. 4) Scoring / Evaluation Practicality- The scoring/evaluation process should fits into the time allocation. Please put this text in graph
• 20.
  Authenticity Authenticity is thedegree of correspondence of the characteristics of a given language test task to the features of a target language task Brown (2004:28). Brown (2004:28) also proposes considerations that might be helpful to present authenticity in a test.  The language in the test is natural as possible.  Items are contextualized rather than isolated. Topics are meaningful (relevant, interesting) to the learners. Some thematic organization to items is provided, such as through a story or episode. Tasks represent, or closely approximate, real-world tasks.
• 21.
  Washback/Backwash The term washbackis commonly used in applied linguistics. it is rarely found in dictionaries. “An effect that is not the direct result of something” Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. In dealing with principles of language assessment, these two words somehow can be interchangeable. Washback (Brown, 2004) or Backwash (Heaton, 1990)
• 22.
  The influence oftesting on teaching and learning. The influence itself can be positive or negative (Cheng et al. (Eds.), 2008:7-11) Positive Wash back Teachers and students have a positive attitude toward the examination or test, and work willingly and collaboratively towards its objective (Cheng & Curtis, 200). Negative Wash back Negative Wash back does not give any beneficial influence on teaching and learning (Cheng and Curtis, 2008:9).
• 23.
  The quality ofwash back might be independent of the quality of the test.  (Fulcher & Davidson, 2007:225). teachers as the test constructor need to consider the probability of the wash back of tests which will be constructed and what the future impact on teaching and learning later on. Teaching and learning will be impacted in many different ways depending upon the variables at play at specific contexts. What these variables are, how they are to be weighted, and whether we can discover patterns of interaction that may hold steady across contexts, is a matter for ongoing research (Fulcher & Davidson, 2007:229).
• 24.
  Conclusion  A testis good if it contains practicality, good validity, high reliability, authenticity, and positive wash back. The five principles provides guidelines for both constructing and evaluating the tests. Teachers should apply these five principles in constructing or evaluating tests which will be used in assessment activities.