Филологические науки/5. Методы и приемы контроля уровня владения иностранным языком

Алексеева А.В.

Витебский государственный университет им П.М. Машерова, Беларусь

Testing technology in educational process

Nowadays the process of teaching includes using such method as testing. It is one of excellent teaching methods, as it provides a good and quick assessment of general language competence. In this article you can find a summary of general testing formats and the investigation of testing items, main kinds of questions and test qualities.

There are two types of educational tests. The first is the standardized tests. Such tests are used as a tool to measure student’s learning-ability, reveal their specific abilities, interests and preferences or gauge how much students have learned about a particular subject.

The second one is the non-standardized tests. They can evaluate students' progress in mastering specific information. Many teachers usually make or select these tests, so they're also known as teachers' tests [1, p. 243]. They are usually flexible in scope and format, variable in difficulty and significance. Since these tests are usually developed by individual instructors, the format and difficulty of these tests may not be widely adopted or used by other instructors or institutions. A non-standardized test may be used to determine the proficiency level of students, to motivate students to study, and to provide feedback to students. In some instances, a teacher may develop non-standardized tests that resemble standardized tests in scope, format, and difficulty for the purpose of preparing their students for an upcoming standardized test [2, p. 8]

In making or selecting tests, the teacher must decide which kinds of questions to use and how to present the test. For instance, in objective tests, students select or supply specific, short answer. Common ones are: alternate-response (such as true-false questions), multiple-choice, fill-in, short answer, matching etc. Such kind of test has much more positive moments than any other kind, for several reasons. First, they are convenient to take. Second, they test a lot of knowledge in a short time. Third, the score can’t be influenced by the teacher’s opinion – the answers are either right or wrong. This is why the tests are called “objective”. Fourth, these tests take little time to score.

On essay tests, students express answers in their own words. An essay question asks students to explain, discuss, summarize, outline, or otherwise coherently examine a topic. Students have much more freedom and may express their own ideas or to reach their own conclusions. There are two categories of essay questions: 1. Extended-response items let to organize the answers to display students’ understanding of the subject. 2. Restricted-response question limits the answers in some way, such as length, topics to be covered, time available, or the number of points should list [1, p. 356-357].

Sometimes, oral tests are the best way to measure skills. They assess students’ ability to express and organize ideas, to speak clearly, to converse in another language, and understand what students hear. Oral tests are especially useful in the primary grades, when pupils have not yet learned to read or write. They are also helpful in remedial reading classes [3].

Some course goals require producing a certain result, or product. The teacher may evaluate students’ progress with a performance test, which shows how good their skills are. Performance test are typical in speech, drama, social adjustment, reciting, and game learning [4, p.278-281].

The C-test is an integrative testing instrument that measures overall language competence, very much like the close test. It consists of four to six short, preferably authentic, texts in the target language, to which “the rule of two” has been applied: the second half of every second word has been deleted, beginning with the second word of the second sentence; the first and last sentences are left intact. If a word has an odd number of letters, the bigger part is omitted. In a typical C-test there are 100 gaps – that is, missing parts. Only entirely correct restorations are accepted.

The C-test was developed as a modification of the close test, which is a frequently used, major language-testing instrument, extremely popular because of the ease of constructing it and its high reliability and validity. The close test consists of a longer text of witch every fifth or tenth complete word is left out [5, p. 270-271].

There are some items used in any teacher-made or teacher-selected test. Alternative-response questions are often called “hole-in-ones” because we are given a choice of two answers, one of which is right. Although most alternative-response items are true-false questions, there are other kinds. Such items usually measure the ability to recognize a correct or incorrect statement or fact, term definition, or statement of principle. They also assess how well students separate fact from opinion, whether they recognize cause-and-effect relationships, and can they use simple logic and classify a group of items.

Multiple-choice is the objective item teachers use most. Depending on the teacher’s goals and the subject, basic multiple-choice items usually consist of an incomplete statement or a question, followed by three or more possible choices. A well-written multiple-chose test can give the teacher a lot of information. By analyzing the students’ mistakes, for example, you can see where the student needs help. Here are some examples of what knowledge multiple-choice items may measure: understanding a concept, applying facts and principles, factual knowledge, understanding words, reasoning and thinking, memorizing, knowledge of methods and procedures, interpreting cause and effect, grouping or classifying a number of items, recognizing a false response [1, p. 326-337].

A matching item on a test usually has two lists of facts or principles. A student must match each entry in the first list with a word, symbol, phrase, or sentence in the second list. Answers may be marked with numbers or letters. The easier matching items are those that use two columns. More difficult matching tests use three or more columns. Sometimes the first list can have fewer entries then the second one. This is an attempt by test developers to prevent guessing. But sometimes the columns are even and the directions say students may use each answer once, more than once, or not at all. This is another way to prevent students from using the process of elimination to answer. Matching items test the skill in selecting the correct relationships between groups. They test the ability to recognize and recall information [1, p. 341-343].

Fill-in items require supplying words, names, numbers, dates, or symbols missing from an incomplete statement. A blank space usually is provided within or next to the item. Fill-in item appear in many objective tests and show up in lots of different ways. The answers are short and specific. Such items measure the ability to understand concepts and real facts. No choices are given, so students must supply, rather than recognize, the answers [1, p. 348-349].

Like fill-ins, short-answer items require to recall information to supply an answer. The only difference between them is that a short-answer item is a question, while a fill-in is an incomplete statement. Short-answer questions require a brief response: a list, a name, a date, a few words, or a complete sentence. They are often used as a review in the textbooks. Teachers also can use this kind of questions in classroom discussions and review sessions [1, p. 352-354].

To answer an open-book item, students must search to find the answer using reference materials – books or notes. It can be used as homework assignments. Studies have shown that open-book tests can be as reliable as other kind of tests. Successful learners usually get high grades. This is because they usually are familiar with the reference materials and tend to be good readers. Such kind of test can be given to help students overcome a fear of tests. Open-book items measure the ability to find, organize, and use information to answer a specific question. They also measure thinking skills, such as recognizing relationships, classifying data, analyzing and criticizing, and choosing between important and trivial information [1, p. 365-367].

Graph, table, and charts are convenient ways to present a lot of information. Tests use them to find out how well students interpret data. The teacher can see whether students recognize relationships; whether they reach logical conclusions and make sensible predictions; and whether they can apply data from a graph, table, or chart to a specific situation. Tests can measure these skills in two ways. They may contain questions about data laid out in graph, table, or chart. Or, they may supply data from which you must construct one of them [1, p. 378-381].

The quality of any test can be measured by several standards. These are validity, reliability, and, to a lesser extent, practicality. To be useful, a standardized test must show these three qualities.

A test is valid depending on how well it measures what it is supposed to, and how the results are interpreted. Validity refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores. On any test teachers should review the scores for validity.

Reliability refers to the “sameness”, or consistency, of test result. It can be measured in several ways. Teachers may give the same test twice and compare the results. Or, they may give two different forms of a test to the same students within a short time. A third method is to give students a complete test split the results in half. Teachers then compare the results students get on each half. If the test results are inconsistent, the test may need additional review. A reliable test isn’t necessarily a valid test. A reliable test is invalid when it is used for the wrong purpose. Teacher-made test are likely to be less reliable than standardizes tests.

Practicality involves the cost and convenience of a test. A standardized must be practical within a particular setting. If the results are too difficult for school personnel to interpret, the test is too costly; its practicality is also in doubt [1, p. 400-402].

Standardized tests have been criticized for a number of reasons. Some educators suggest that such tests have a negative influence on education. They argue that widespread emphasis on test scores inhibits a student’s “yearning for learning”. A student quickly learns to study for good test results rather than the joy of discovery.

Standardized tests also are limited in their usefulness for measuring students’ abilities. These tests sometimes leg behind educational thought and practice. Because of this, they may provide an incomplete reflection of what a student has learned. Learning ability test often emphasize skills that are frequently used in school, such as verbal ability, but overlook other gifts, such as originality. Such tests give only an incomplete picture of a student’s potential for learning.

Nevertheless, the using of testing technology is helpful for modern teacher because the results of the test can show when students are ready to move on, reveal specific areas where pupils are having difficulty, count their grade level.

LITERATURE

1. Nault, William H. The world book of study power / William H. Nault. – USA : World Book Inc., 1994, – 575 p.

2. Smith, Mary Lee. Put to the Test: The Effects of External Testing on Teachers / Marry Lee Smith // Educational Researcher. – June 1991. – P. 8-11.

3. Dobson, Julia M. Effective techniques For English Conversation Group / Julia M. Dobson. – House Publisher, 1997. – 368 p.

4. Karnes, M. The preschool/primary gifted child / M. Karnes, L. Jonson // Journal for education of the gifted. – 1991. – no. 14(3). – P. 267-283.

5. Katona, L. The C-test: A teacher-Friendly way to Test Language Proficiency / Lusy Katona // Teacher development. Making the right moves: selected articles from the English teaching forum 1989-1993. – United states Information Agency : Washington, D.C., 1994. – 278 p.