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

could be applicable for checking a definite item; it is not necessary that

it will cover broader topics of the language. However, further Hughes

assumes that this test is rather difficult to design and the size of the

test can be even impractical. It means that if the teacher wants to check

the students’ knowledge of Present simple, s/he will require a great deal

of examples for the students to choose from. It will demand a tiresome work

from the teacher to compose such type of the test, and may even confuse the

learners.

At that point we can allude to our experience in giving a diagnostic

test in Form 5. It was the class the teacher had worked before and knew the

students and their level rather good. However, new learners had joined the

class, and the teacher had not a slightest idea about their abilities. It

was obvious that the students worried about how they would accomplish the

test and what marks would they receive. The teacher had ensured them that

the test would not be evaluated by marks. It was necessary for the teacher

to plan her future work. That was done to release the tension in the class

and make the students get rid of the stress that might be crucial for the

results. The students immediately felt free and set to work. Later when

analysing and summarizing the results the teacher realized that the

students’ knowledge was purely good. Certainly, there were the place the

students required more practice; therefore during the next class the

students were offered remedial activities on the points they had

encountered any difficulties. Moreover, that was the case when the students

were particularly interested in their marks.

To conclude, we can conceive that interpreting the results of

diagnostic tests the teachers apart from predicting why the student has

done the exercises the way s/he has, but not the other, will receive a

significant information about his/her group s/he is going to work with and

later use the information as a basis for the forming syllabus.

3.2 Placement tests

Another type of test we are intended to discuss is a placement test.

Concerning Longman Dictionary of LTAL again (279-280) we can see that a

placement test is a test that places the students at an appropriate level

in a programme or a course. This term does not refer to the system and

construction of the test, but to its usage purpose. According to Hughes

(1989:7), this type of test is also used to decide which group or class the

learner could be joined to. This statement is entirely supported by another

scholar, such as Alderson (1996:216), who declares that this type of test

is meant for showing the teacher the students’ level of the language

ability. It will assist to put the student exactly in that group that

responds his/her true abilities.

Heaton (ibid.) adheres that the following type of testing should be

general and should purely focus on a vast range of topics of the language

not on just specific one. Therefore, the placement test typically could be

represented in the form of dictations, interviews, grammar tests, etc.

Moreover, according to Heaton (ibid.), the placement test should deal

exactly with the language skills relevant to those that will be taught

during a particular course. If our course includes development of writing

skills required for politics, it is not appropriate to study writing

required for medical purposes. Thus, Heaton (ibid.) presumes that is fairly

important to analyse and study the syllabus beforehand. For the placement

test is completely attributed to the future course programme. Furthermore,

Hughes (ibid.) stresses that each institution will have its own placement

tests meeting its needs. The test suitable for one institution will not

suit the needs of another. Likewise, the matter of scoring is particularly

significant in the case of placement tests, for the scores gathered serve

as a basis for putting the students into different groups appropriate to

their level.

At this point we can attempt to compare a placement test and

diagnostic one. From the first sight these both types of tests could look

similar. They both are given at the beginning of the study year and both

are meant for distinguishing the students’ level of the current knowledge.

However, if we consider the facts described in sub-chapter 2.1 we will see

how they are different. A diagnostic test is meant for displaying a picture

of the students’ general knowledge at the beginning of the study year for

the teacher to plan further work and design an appropriate syllabus for

his/her students. Whereas, a placement test is designed and given in order

to use the information of the students’ knowledge for putting the students

into groups according to their level of the language. Indeed, they are both

used for teacher’s planning of the course their functions differ. A

colleague of mine, who works at school, has informed me that they have used

a placement test at the beginning of the year and it appeared to be

relevant and efficient for her and her colleague’s future teaching. The

students were divided according to their English language abilities: the

students with better knowledge were put together, whereas the weaker

students formed their own group. It does not mean discrimination between

the students. The teachers have explained the students the reason for such

actions, why it was necessary – they wanted to produce an appropriate

teaching for each student taking his/her abilities into account. The

teachers have altered their syllabus to meet the demands of the students.

The result proved to be satisfying. The students with better knowledge

progressed; no one halted them. The weaker students have gradually improved

their knowledge, for they received due attention than it would be in a

mixed group.

3.3 Progress test

Having discussed two types of tests that are usually used at the

beginning, we can approach the test typically employed during the study

year to check the students’ development. We will speak about a progress

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9