Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Quality of Written Instructions in Teacher-Made Tests of English as a Foreign Language

教師自編英語測驗書面指導語之品質

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
English Teaching & Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Test instructions inform learners how they should behave and proceed in a testing situation, what is expected from them, and how their answers will be assessed. Despite their impact on test performance, the available literature on foreign language test construction is lacking in regard to instructions. By reviewing the relevant contemporary literature, the authors compiled a list of six criteria (length, language, type of sentence, informativeness, component parts, medium of communication) that need to be met in writing quality instructions. Subsequently, 64 English language tests containing 308 instructions for grades 5–8 of elementary school in Serbia were analyzed to assess to what extent they fulfilled these criteria. The instructions were found to be sufficiently concise and clear, and were primarily written in the foreign language of study. However, many were not sufficiently detailed and lacked important information. The analysis revealed three other criteria quality instructions should meet which were not found in the consulted literature: contextualization/personalization, correctness, and language accuracy. Few instructions meeting the first additional criterion were found, while a greater number of examples were illustrative of the remaining two. The results necessitate that teachers of English as a foreign language be trained in writing test instructions either as part of their initial teacher education or professional development in order to be able to conduct quality testing.

摘要

測驗指導語能讓學習者得知在測驗的情境中,他們該如何表現和進行測試,對他們的期望是什麼,及他們的答案將會如何被評量。儘管測驗指導語對測驗成績有影響,但在現有的外語測驗建構的文獻中仍顯不足。回顧相關當代文獻後,作者整理出六個在撰寫高品質測驗指導語時需符合的指標(長度、語言、句型、資訊量、組成要件、溝通媒介)。隨後,我們對塞爾維亞5-8年級64個英語測驗中的308個指導語進行分析,以評估這些指導語符合上述六個指標的程度。分析結果發現,這些指導語均相當簡潔清楚,且主要是以學習的外語編寫而成。然而,許多指導語仍不夠詳細,且缺乏重要資訊。分析發現,高品質的指導語還應符合另外三個未在文獻中發現的指標:情境化/個人化、正確性、和語言準確性。符合第一項附加指標的指導語很少,足以說明其餘兩個指標的例子則較多。研究結果顯示英語老師有必要接受編寫測驗指導語的訓練,此訓練可作為師資培育或是教師專業發展的一部分,以便進行高品質測驗。

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

The datasets analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to their volume and the participants’ anonymity, but are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Code Availability

The coding of the datasets is not publicly available, but can be obtained from the corresponding author upon request.

Notes

  1. Some authors [e.g., 16, 20, 35] use the terms “instruction” and “rubric” as synonyms, while Bachman and Palmer [5] use them as noted in the text.

References

  1. Alderson, C. J. (2001). Assessing reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alderson, C. J., Clapham, C., & Wall, D. (2002). Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alderson, C. J., & Hughes, A. (Eds.). (1981). ELT documents. 111 issues in language testing. London: British Council.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Author. (2017). Značaj nastavničkih testova unastavi stranih jezika [Importance of teacher-made tests in foreign language teaching]. Nasleđe, XIV/36, 285–297.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boyle, J., & Fisher, S. (2007). Educational testing. A competence-based approach. Malden, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, D. (2004). Language assessment. Principles and classroom practices. White Plains: Pearson Education Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  8. Buck, G. (2002). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cohen, A. (1994). Assessing language ability in the classroom (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Daller, H., Milton, J., & Treffers-Daller, J. (Eds.). (2007). Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. DeLuca, C., & Klinger, D. (2010). Assessment literacy development: identifying gaps in teacher candidates’ learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17(4), 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.516643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. DiDonato-Barnes, N., Fives, H., & Krause, E. S. (2013). Using a table of specifications to improve teacher-constructed traditional tests: An experimental design. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2013.808173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dimitrijević, N. (1999). Testiranje u nastavi stranih jezika. [Foreign language testing]. Beograd, SER: Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding language testing. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Frey, B., Petersen, S., Edwards, L., Teramoto Pedrotti, J., & Peyton, V. (2005). Item-writing rules: Collective wisdom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(4), 357–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical language testing. London: Hodder Education.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2007). Language testing and assessment. An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Haladyna, T., & M., & Downing, S., M. (1989). A taxonomy of multiple-choice item-writing rules. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0201_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodrigez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15(3), 309–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Heaton, J. B. (1990). Writing English language tests: Longman handbooks for language teachers. Harlow: Longman Group UK Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hogan, T., & Murphy, G. (2007). Recommendations for preparing and scoring constructed-response items: What the experts say. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(4), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340701580736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lakin, J. (2014). Test directions as a critical component of test design: Best practices and the impact of examinee characteristics. Educational Assessment, 19(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2014.869448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Long, M. H. (2005). Second language needs analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Luoma, S. (2009). Assessing speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Madsen, H. (1983). Techniques in testing. New York / Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Marso, R., & Pigge, F. (1992). A summary of published research: classroom teachers’ knowledge and skills related to the development and use of teacher-made tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED346148.pdf. Accessed 8 Aug 2020.

  28. McKey, P. (2008). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Milton, J. (2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  30. Nation, I. S. P. (2009). Teaching ESL / EFL reading and writing. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Prošić-Santovac, D., Savić, V., & Rixon, S. (2019). Assessing young English language learners in Serbia: Teachers’ attitudes and practices. In D. Prošić-Santovac & S. Rixon (Eds.), Integrating assessment into early language learning and teaching (pp. 251-265). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788924825-019

  32. Purpura, J. (2004). Assessing grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  34. Schedl, M., & Malloy, J. (2014). Writing items and tasks. In A. J. Kunnan (Ed.), The companion to language assessment (1st ed., pp. 796–813). Hoboken: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118411360.wbcla025.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Tsagari, D., Vogt, K., Froehlich, V., Csepes, I., Fekete, A., Green, A., Hamp-Lyons, L., Sifakis, N., & Kordia, S. (2018). Handbook of assessment for language teachers. European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ugwu, N.-G., & Mkpuma, S. O. (2019). Ensuring quality in education: validity in teacher-made language tests in secondary schools in Ebonyi State. American Journal of Educational Research, 7(7), 518–523. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-7-7-12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Weigle, S. C. (2009). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach. Houndmills / New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  39. Wu, J. R. W. (2014). Investigating Taiwanese teachers’ language testing and assessment needs. English Teaching and Learning, 38(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.6330/ETL.2014.38.1.01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zhang, C., & Yan, X. (2018). Assessment literacy of secondary EFL teachers: Evidence from a regional EFL test. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 41(1), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2018-0002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the two anonymous reviewers whose comments helped them improve the quality and readability of the paper, as well as the precision of their thought.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tatjana Glušac.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Glušac, T., Milić, M. Quality of Written Instructions in Teacher-Made Tests of English as a Foreign Language. English Teaching & Learning 46, 39–57 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-021-00079-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-021-00079-1

Keywords

關鍵詞

Navigation