Types of tests used in English Language Teaching Bachelor Paper
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
test. According to Alderson (1996:217), progress test will show the teacher
whether the students have learnt the recently taught material successfully.
Basically, the teacher intends to check certain items, not general topics
covered during the school or study year. Commonly, it is not very long and
is determined to check the recent material. Therefore, the teacher might
expect his/her learners to get rather high scores. The following type is
supposed to be used after the students have learnt either a set of units on
a theme or have covered a definite topic of the language. It will display
the teacher whether the material has been successfully acquired or the
students need additional practice instead of starting a new material.
A progress test will basically display the activities based on the
material the teacher is determined to check. To evaluate it the teacher can
work out a certain system of points that later will compose a mark.
Typically, such tests do not influence the students’ final mark at the end
of the year.
The authorities of school demand the teachers to conduct progress
tests, as well. However, the teachers themselves decide on the necessity of
applying them. Nevertheless, we can claim that progress test is inevitable
part of the learning process. We can even take a responsibility to declare
that progress test facilitate the material acquisition in a way. The
students preparing for the test look through the material again and there
is a chance it can be transferred to their long-term memory.
Further, we can come to Alderson (ibid.) who presumes that such type
of testing could function as a motivating fact for the learners, for
success will develop the students’ confidence in their own knowledge and
motivate them study further more vigorously. In case, there will be two or
three students whose scores are rather low, the teacher should encourage
them by providing support in future and imply the idea that studying hard
will allow them to catch up with the rest of the students sooner or later.
The author of the paper basing on her experience agrees with the statement,
for she had noticed that weaker students when they had managed to write
their test successfully became proud of their achievement and started
working better.
However, if the majority of the class scores a rather low grade, the
teacher should be cautious. This could be a signal that there is either
something wrong with the teaching or the students are low motivated or
lazy.
3.4 Achievement tests
Apart from a progress test the teachers employ another type –
achievement test. According to Longman Dictionary of LTAL (3), an
achievement test is a test, which measures a language someone has learned
during a specific course, study or program. Here the progress is
significant and, therefore, is the main point tested.
Alderson (1996:219) posits that achievement tests are “more formal”,
whereas Hughes (1989:8) assumes that this type of tests will fully involve
teachers, for they will be responsible for the preparation of such tests
and giving them to the learners. He repeats the dictionary defining the
notion of achievement tests, adding just that success of the students,
groups of students, or the courses.
Furthermore, Alderson (ibid.) conceives that achievement tests are
mainly given at definite times of the school year. Moreover, they could be
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-
oriented, effective and easy to manage if it tests such skills as writing
or speaking. It could be explained by the fact that the tasks intended to
check the skills mentioned above give us precise information about the
learners’ abilities. Moreover, we can maintain that when testing writing
the teacher demands the students to write a certain task, such as an essay,
a composition or reproduction, and it will be precisely the point the
teacher will be intended to check. There will be certain demands imposed on
writing test; the teacher might be just interested in the students’ ability
to produce the right layout of an essay without taking grammar into
account, or, on the contrary, will be more concerned with grammatical and
syntactical structures. What concerns testing speaking skills, here the
author of the paper does not support the idea promoted by Bynom that it
could be treated as direct testing. Definitely, you will have a certain
task to involve your speaking skills; however, speaking is not possible
without employment of listening skills. This in turn will generate the idea
that apart from speaking skills the teacher will test the students’ ability
to understand the speech s/he hears, thus involving speaking skills.
It is said that the advantages of direct testing is that it is
intended to test some certain abilities, and preparation for that usually
involves persistent practice of certain skills. Nevertheless, the skills
tested are deprived from the authentic situation that later may cause
difficulties for the students in using them.
Now we can shift to another notion - indirect testing. It differs from
direct one in the way that it measures a skill through some other skill. It
could mean the incorporation of various skills that are connected with each
other, e.g. listening and speaking skills.
Indirect testing, regarding to Hughes, tests the usage of the language
in real-life situation. Moreover, it suits all situations; whereas direct
testing is bound to certain tasks intended to check a certain skill. Hughes
(ibid.) assumes that indirect testing is more effective than direct one,
for it covers a broader part of the language. It denotes that the learners
are not constrained to one particular skill and a relevant exercise. They
are free to elaborate all four skills; what is checked is their ability to
operate with those skills and apply them in various, even unpredictable
situations. This is the true indicator of the learner’s real knowledge of
the language.
Indirect testing has more advantages that disadvantages, although the
only drawback according to Hughes is that such type of testing is difficult
to evaluate. It could be frustrating what to check and how to check;
whether grammar should be evaluated higher, than composition structure or
vice versa. The author of the paper agrees with that, however, basing on
her experience at school again, she must claim that it is not so easy to
apply indirect testing. This could be rather time-consuming, for it is a
well-known fact that the duration of the class is just forty minutes;
moreover, it is rather complicated to construct indirect test – it demands
a lot of work, but our teachers are usually overloaded with a variety of
other duties. Thus, we can only hope on the course books that supply us
with a variety of activities that involve cooperation of all four skills.
4.2 Discrete point and integrative testing
Having discussed the kinds of testing that deal with general aspects,
such as certain skills and variety of skills in cooperation, we can come to
the more detailed types as discrete point and integrative testing.
According to Longman Dictionary of LTAL (112), discrete point test is a
language test that is meant to test a particular language item, e.g.
tenses. The basis of that type of tests is that we can test components of
the language (grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and spelling) and
language skills (listening, reading, speaking, and writing) separately. We
can declare that discrete point test is a common test used by the teachers
in our schools. Having studied a grammar topic or new vocabulary, having
practiced it a great deal, the teacher basically gives a test based on the
covered material. This test usually includes the items that were studied
and will never display anything else from a far different field. The same
will concern the language skills; if the teacher’ aim is to check reading
skills; the other skills will be neglected. The author of the paper had
used such types of tests herself, especially after a definite grammar topic
was studied. She had to construct the tests herself basing on the examples
displayed in various grammar books. It was usually gap-filling exercises,
multiple choice items or cloze tests. Sometimes a creative work was
offered, where the students had to write a story involving a certain
grammar theme that was being checked. According to her observance, the
students who studied hard were able to complete them successfully, though
there were the cases when the students failed. Now having discussed the
theory on validity, reliability and types of testing, it is even more
difficult to realize who was really to blame for the test failures: either
the tests were wrongly designed or there was a problem in teaching.
Notwithstanding, this type was and still remains to be the most general and
acceptable type in schools of our country, for it is easy to design, it
concerns a certain aspect of the language and is easy to score. If we speak
about types of tests we can say that this way of testing refers more to a
progress test (You can see the examples of such type of test in Appendix
2).
Nevertheless, according to Bynom (2001:8) there is a certain drawback
of discrete point testing, for it tests only separated parts, but does not
show us the whole language. It is true, if our aim is to incorporate the
whole language. Though, if we are to check the exact material the students
were supposed to learn, then why not use it.
Discussing further, we have come to integrative tests. According to
Longman Dictionary of LTAL, the integrative test intends to check several
language skills and language components together or simultaneously. Hughes
(1989:15) stipulates that the integrative tests display the learners’
knowledge of grammar, vocabulary, spelling together, but not as separate
skills or items.
Alderson (1996:219) poses that, by and large, most teachers prefer
using integrative testing to discrete point type. He explains the fact that
basically the teachers either have no enough of spare time to check a
certain split item being tested or the purpose of the test is only
considered to view the whole material. Moreover, some language skills such
as reading do not require the precise investigation of the students’
abilities whether they can cope with definite fragments of the text or not.
We can render the prior statements as the idea that the teachers are mostly
concerned with general language knowledge, but not with bits and pieces of
it. The separate items usually are not capable of showing the real state of
the students’ knowledge. What concerns the author of the paper, she finds
integrative testing very useful, though more habitual one she believes to
be discrete point test. She assumes that the teacher should incorporate
both types of testing for effective evaluation of the students’ true
language abilities.
4.3 Criterion-referenced and norm referenced testing
The next types of testing to be discussed are criterion-referenced and
norm referenced testing. They are not focused directly on the language
items, but on the scores the students can get. Again we should concern
Longman Dictionary of LTAL (17) that states that criterion-referenced test
measures the knowledge of the students according to set standards or
criteria. This means that there will be certain criteria according to which
the students will be assessed. There will be various criteria for different
levels of the students’ language knowledge. Here the aim of testing is not
to compare the results of the students. It is connected with the learners’
knowledge of the subject. As Hughes (1989:16) puts it the criterion-
referenced tests check the actual language abilities of the students. They
distinguish the weak and strong points of the students. The students either
manage to pass the test or fail it. However, they never feel better or
worse than their classmates, for the progress is focused and checked. At
this point we can speak about the centralized exams at the end of the
twelfth and ninth form. As far as the author of the paper is concerned, the
results of the exams are confident, and the learners after passing the
exams are conferred with various levels relevant to their language ability.
Apart from that, once a year in Latvian schools the students are given
tests designed by the officials of the Ministry of Education to check the
level of the students and, what is most important, the work of the teacher.
They call them diagnostic tests, though according to the material discussed
above it is rather arguable. Nevertheless, we can accept the fact that
criterion-referenced testing could be used in the form of diagnostic tests.
Advancing further, we have come to norm-referenced test that measures
the knowledge of the learner and compares it with the knowledge of another
member of his/her group. The learner’s score is compared with the scores of
the other students. According to Hughes (ibid.), this type of test does not
show us what exactly the student knows. Therefore, we presume that the best
test format for the following type of testing could be a placement test,
for it concerns the students’ placement and division according to their
knowledge of the foreign language. There the score is vital, as well.
4.4 Objective and subjective testing
It worth mentioning that apart from scoring and testing the learners’
abilities another essential role could be devoted to indirect factors that
influence evaluating. These are objective and subjective issues in testing.
According to Hughes (1989:19), the difference between these two types is
the way of scoring and presence or absence of the examiner’s judgement. If
there is not any judgement, the test is objective. On the contrary, the
subjective test involves personal judgement of the examiner. The author of
the paper sees it as when testing the students objectively, the teacher
usually checks just the knowledge of the topic. Whereas, testing
subjectively could imply the teacher’s ideas and judgements. This could be
encountered during speaking test where the student can produce either
positive or negative impression on the teacher. Moreover, the teacher’s
impression and his/her knowledge of the students’ true abilities can
seriously influence assessing process. For example, the student has failed
the test; however, the teacher knows the true abilities of the student and,
therefore, s/he will assess the work of that student differently taking all
the factors into account.
4.5 Communicative language testing
Referring to Bynom (ibid.), this type of testing has become popular
since 1970-80s. It involves the knowledge of grammar and how it could be
applied in written and oral language; the knowledge when to speak and what
to say in an appropriate situation; knowledge of verbal and non-verbal
communication. All these types of knowledge should be successfully used in
a situation. It bases on the functional use of the language. Moreover,
communicative language testing helps the learners feel themselves in real-
life situation and acquire the relevant language.
Weir (1990:7) stipulates that the current type of testing tests
exactly the “performance” of communication. Further, he develops the idea
of “competence” due to the fact that an individual usually acts in a
variety of situations. Afterwards, reconsidering Bachman’s idea he comes
with another notion – ‘communicative language ability’.
Weir (1990:10-11) assumes that in order to work out a good
communicative language test we have to bear in mind the issue of precision:
both the skills and performance should be accurate. Besides, their
collaboration is vital for the students’ placement in the so-called ‘real
life situation’. However, without a context the communicative language test
would not function. The context should be as closer to the real life as
possible. It is required in order to help the student feel him/herself in
the natural environment. Furthermore, Weir (ibid.) stresses that language
‘fades’ if deprived of the context.
Weir (ibid., p.11) says: “to measure language proficiency adequately
in each situation, account must be taken of: where, when, how, with whom,
and why the language is to be used, and on what topics, and with what
effect.” Moreover, Weirs (ibid.) emphasises the crucial role of the
schemata (prior knowledge) in the communicative language tests.
The tasks used in the communicative language testing should be
authentic and ‘direct’ in order the student will be able to perform as it
is done in everyday life.
According to Weir (ibid.), the students have to be ready to speak in
any situation; they have to be ready to discuss some topics in groups and
be able to overcome difficulties met in the natural environment. Therefore,
the tests of this type are never simplified, but are given as they could be
encountered in the surroundings of the native speaker. Moreover, the
student has to possess some communicative skills, that is how to behave in
a certain situation, how to apply body language, etc.
Finally, we can repeat that communicative language testing involves
the learner’s ability to operate with the language s/he knows and apply it
in a certain situation s/he is placed in. S/he should be capable of
behaving in real-life situation with confidence and be ready to supply the
information required by a certain situation. Thereof, we can speak about
communicative language testing as a testing of the student’s ability to
behave him/herself, as he or she would do in everyday life. We evaluate
their performance.
To conclude we will repeat that there are different types testing used
in the language teaching: discreet point and integrative testing, direct
and indirect testing, etc. All of them are vital for testing the students.
Chapter 5
Testing the Language Skills
In this chapter we will attempt to examine the various elements or
formats of tests that could be applied for testing of four language skills:
reading, listening, writing and speaking. First, we will look at multiple-
choice tests, after that we will come to cloze tests and gap filling, then
to dictations and so on. Ultimately, we will attempt to draw a parallel
between them and the skills they could be used for.
5.1 Multiple choice tests
It is not surprising why we have started exactly with multiple-choice
tests (MCQs, further in the text). To the author’s concern these tests are
widely used by teachers in their teaching practice, and, moreover, are
favoured by the students (Here the author has been supported by the
equivalent idea of Alderson (1996:222)). Heaton (1990:79) believes that
multiple-choice questions are basically employed to test vocabulary.
However, we can argue with the statement, for the multiple choice tests
could be successfully used for testing grammar, as well as for testing
listening or reading skills.
It is a well-known fact how a multiple-choice test looks like:
1. ---- not until the invention of the camera that artists
correctly painted horses racing.
A) There was
B) It was
C) There
D) It
“Cambridge Preparation for the TOEFL Test”:
A task basically is represented by a number of sentences, which should
be provided with the right variant, that, in its turn, is usually given
below. Furthermore, apart from the right variant the students are offered a
set of distractors, which are normally introduced in order to “deceive” the
learner. If the student knows the material that is being tested, s/he will
spot the right variant, supply it and successfully accomplish the task. The
distractors, or wrong words, basically slightly differ from the correct
variant and sometimes are even funny. Nevertheless, very often they could
be represented by the synonyms of the correct answer whose differences are
known to those who encounter the language more frequently as their job or
study field. In that case they could be hardly differentiated, and the
students are frustrated. Certainly, the following cases could be implied
when teaching vocabulary, and, consequently, will demand the students’
ability to use the right synonym. The author of the paper had given the
multiple-choice tests to her students and must confess that despite
difficulties in preparing them, the students found them easier to do. They
motivated their favour for them as it was rather convenient for them to
find the right variant, definitely if they knew what to look for. We
presume that such test format as if motivated the learners and supplied
them additional support that they were deprived during the test where
nobody could hope for the teacher’s help.
Everything mentioned above has raised the author’s interest in the
theory on multiple-choice test format and, therefore, she finds extremely
useful the following list of advantages and disadvantages generated by
Weir. He (1990:43) lists four advantages and six disadvantages of the
multiple-choice questions test. Let us look at the advantages first:
. According to Weir, the multiple-choice questions are structured in
such a form that there is no possibility for the teacher or as he
places “marker” to apply his/her personal attitude to the marking
process.
The author of the paper finds it to be very significant, for employing
the test of this format we see only what the student knows or does not
know; the teacher cannot raise or lower the marker basing on the students’
additional ideas displayed in the work. Furthermore, the teacher, though
knowing the strong and weak points of his/her students, cannot apply this
information as well to influence the mark. What s/he gets are the pure
facts of the students’ knowledge.
Another advantage is:
. The usage of pre-test that could be helpful for stating the level of
difficulty of the examples and the test in the whole. That will
reduce the probability of the test being inadequate or too
complicated both for completing and marking.
This could mean that the teacher can ensure his/her students and
him/herself against failures. For this purposes s/he just has to test the
multiple-choice test to avoid troubles connected with its inadequacy that
later can lead to the disaster for the students receiving bad marks due to
the fact that the test’s examples were too complicated or too ambiguous.
The next advantage concerns the format of the test that clearly implies
the idea of what the learner should do. The instructions are clear,
unambiguous. The students know what they are expected to do and do not
waste their precious time on trying to figure out what they are supposed to
do.
The last advantage displayed by Weir is that the MCQs in a certain
context are better than open-ended or short-answer questions, for the
learners are not required to produce their writing skills. This eliminates
the students’ fear of mistakes they can make while writing; moreover, the
task does not demand any creative activity, but only checks the exact
knowledge of the material.
Having considered the advantages of MCQs, it is worth speaking about its
disadvantages. We will not present all of them only what we find of the
utmost interest and value for us.
The first disadvantage concerns the students’ guessing the answers;
therefore, we cannot objectively judge his/her true knowledge of the topic.
We are not able to see whether the student knows the material or have just
luckily ticked or circled the right variant. Therefore, it could be
connected with another shortcoming of the following test format that while
scoring the teacher will not get the right and true picture of what the
Ñòðàíèöû: 1, 2, 3
|