Designing an english achievement test for the first – year english non major students in son la teachers’ training college

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 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. - 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. 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. 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 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. 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. In addition, more formal achievement tests require careful preparation; teacher could feel free to set their own ways to make a rough check on students’ progress to keep learners on their toes. Since such tests will not form part of formal assessment procedures, their construction and scoring need not be purely towards the intermediate objectives on which a more formal progress achievement tests are based. However, they can reflect a particular ‘route’ that an individual teacher is taking towards the achievement of objectives. 2.2.3 Diagnostic Tests According to Hughes (1990:13), “Diagnostic tests are used to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses. They are intended primarily to ascertain what further teaching is necessary”. Brown (1994:259) proposes, “A diagnostic test is designed to diagnose a particular aspect of a particular language.” Harrison (1983) remarks that this kind of tests is used at the ends of a unit in the course book or after a lesson designed to teach one particular point. This kind of test is reasonably straight-forward to find out what skills are applied well or badly by the learners. Otherwise, this leads to disadvantage, as it is not so easy to obtain a detailed analysis of a learner’s command of grammatical structures. In order to be sure of this, we would need a number of examples of the choice the student made between the two structures in every different context on which we thought was significantly different and important enough to warrant obtaining information. Tests of this kind still need a tremendous amount of work to produce. Whether or not they become generally available will depend on the willingness of individuals to write them and of publishers to distribute them. 2.2.4 Placement tests According to Hughes (1990:14), “Placement tests are intended to provide information which will help to place students at the stage of the teaching progamme most appropriate to their abilities. Typically, they are used to assign students to classes at different levels.” In other words, we use placement tests to place pupils into classes according to their ability so that they can start a course approximately at the same level as the other students in the group. 2.2.5 Progress Tests A progress test is designed to measure the extent to which the students have mastered the material taught in the classroom. It is based on the language programme which the students have been following and is just as important as an assessment of the teacher's own work as the students' own learning. Results obtained from the progress tests enable the teacher to become more familiar with the work of each of the students and with the progress of the class in general. It also aims at stimulating learning and reinforcing what has been taught. Good performances may act as a mean of encouraging the students, and even poor performances may act as an incentive-to more work. According to Baker (1989, p.103), the frequent use of the progress test, as a goad to encourage application on the part of the learners, can also in theory serve as a basis for decisions on course content, learner placement and future course design. He also concludes that the results of a progress test can be used as an indication to parts of the course content, which have not been mastered by numbers of students and thus need remedial action. Moreover, a properly written progress test sampling correctly from the course content can be a pointer to learners which part of the course need more attention, and to course designers which parts of the course have not been effective. Whereas, Khoa's research (1999, p. 13) establishes: “A progress test is an ‘on-the-way’ achievement test, which is linked to the specific content of a particular set "of teaching materials" or particular course of instruction. Progress tests are prepared by a teacher and given