DOI: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i1.4913
Assessment and testing of English as a foreign
language
in the post-method era: reading and speaking tests
Gabriel
Arturo Farías Rojas
Academia de Idiomas PDI - Chile
Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez - Chile
Miriam
Elizabeth Cid Uribe
Universidad de Santiago de Chile
Alexis
Osvaldo Reyes Villalobos
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile
Bárbara
Catalina Cienfuegos Illanes
Universidad Central - Chile
Silvia
Arias Becker
Universidad de Santiago de Chile
ABSTRACT
The
objective of this paper is to present a bibliographical revision of the
assessment and testing literature in the light of the Post-method Era.
Therefore, the reflection out of that will be reinforced with the analysis of
two examples of evaluation, both reading and speaking tests. The order will be
introducing the philosophical grounds of evaluation and the Post-method Era;
then two tests made by the authors will be presented. After that, the specific
objectives of each one of the tests will be shown based on the introduction.
Finally, there will be a discussion of the specific nature of the assessment
procedures shown by referring to literature in the field of assessment and
testing.
Keywords:
assessment;
testing; post-method era; reading tests; speaking tests
Correspondencia:
[email protected]
Artículo
recibido 15 enero 2023 Aceptado para publicación: 05 febrero 2023
Conflictos
de Interés: Ninguna que declarar
Todo el contenido de Ciencia
Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, publicados en este sitio están
disponibles bajo Licencia Creative Commons 
.
Cómo
citar: Farías Rojas, G. A., Cid Uribe, M. E.,
Reyes Villalobos, A. O., Cienfuegos Illanes, B. C., & Arias Becker, S.
(2023). Assessment and testing of english as a foreign language in the
post-method era: reading and speaking tests. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica
Multidisciplinar, 7(1), 6185-6596. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v7i1.4913
Evaluación y prueba de Inglés como lengua
extranjera
en la era post-método: pruebas de lectura y
expresión oral
RESUMEN
El objetivo de este
trabajo es presentar una revisión bibliográfica de la literatura sobre
evaluación y testing a la luz de la Era Posmétodo. Por tanto, la reflexión a
partir de ello se reforzará con el análisis de dos ejemplos de evaluación,
tanto de lectura como de expresión oral. La orden irá introduciendo los
fundamentos filosóficos de la evaluación y la Era Posmétodo; luego se
presentarán dos ensayos realizados por los autores. A continuación, se
mostrarán los objetivos específicos de cada una de las pruebas a partir de la
introducción. Finalmente, habrá una discusión sobre la naturaleza específica de
los procedimientos de evaluación que se muestran haciendo referencia a la
literatura en el campo de la evaluación y las pruebas.
Palabras clave: evaluación; pruebas; era
post-método; pruebas de lectura; pruebas de habla
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, in the Post-Method Era,
teachers have to make not only decisions on the planning process and the methodologies
to be chosen for their lessons but also on the Evaluation Procedures to be
followed so as to be consistent with the previously mentioned stages. That way,
the likelihood of having good lessons together with the learners’ effective
understanding of them increases. However, with the advent of the Communicative
Language Teaching Approach, decision-making has not been an easy task for the
current EFL teacher as he/she must have successful understanding of both
knowledge on the language and the actual ability to use the language.
Therefore, in order to test students’ achievement of both knowledge and skills
in English as a Foreign Language, teachers have had to benefit from
Communicative exercises and those ones which consider procedures from previous
Teaching Approaches such as Grammar Translation, Audiolingual, among other
ones.
This reality is reflected on by
Kumaravadivelu (2003) whose understanding of teaching has to do with the fact
that there are not any methods at all for teachers and researchers to discover
and use. As a consequence of this, evaluation must be decided on by considering
what it is we want our students to reach and how this can be tested.
Nonetheless, as the Post-Method Era involves Communicative Language Teaching
with procedures from other Teaching Approaches throughout history, then it will
still be good to focus on both Second and Third Generation Tests as shown by
Lennon (2013) in order to account for both reliability and validity. The former
has to do with exact scoring whereas the second one has to do with the use of
language in a meaningful context.
Regarding assessment, it needs to
guarantee students’ successful achievement of knowledge of the foreign language
and foreign language ability. The dichotomy between usage and use is worth
mentioning by referring to Widdowson (1978). To him, language is not just an
abstract system –usage- for people to put into practice; it is rather a process
of communication, i.e., a process of language use. Thus, a teacher’s role is
that of going for use and usage so as to make foreign language learning take
place.
Assessment Procedure (Achievement TESTS)
Here are two different kinds of examination, which
will be compared and contrasted. In the first test, students will be assessed
on reading skills (Receptive skill), whereas in the second one students will be
assessed on speaking (productive skill) skills
Reading
Evaluation (Formal Assessment):
TEST on Reading Comprehension: “PRONOUN REFERENCE
QUESTIONS + WORD MEANING”
Name:
Date: March 4th, 2017.
Total score: 26 points.
Achieved Score:
Mark (or “grade”):
Questions 1 to 5 refer to the following passage (2
points each / 10 points in total):
Egypt's army has cautioned
that it will intervene next weekend if mass rallies against the president
descend into violence, in one of its strongest warnings since it handed over to
civilian government a year ago. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, the defence minister,
said he would not allow "attack on the will of the people" and called
for political reconciliation in the week before mass rallies against President
Mohamed Morsi next Sunday.
"There is a
state of division in society and the continuation of it is a danger to the
Egyptian state and there must be consensus among all," Sisi said.
1. Take a look at the
following map and answer the following questions by giving the right answer.
Remember to use the phrases for giving directions learnt in class. You are
located where the arrow starts in East Street. (4 points each /20 points in
total)
(You are
here)
Example:
Question: Where is the library?
Answer: Go straight on as far as South Street, then
turn left up to the bookstore. The library is opposite the bookstore, between
the City Hall and the Post Office.
1)
How do I get to the Hotel? (next to)
2)
Where is the Bar? (across from / opposite)
3)
How can I get to the School?(next to / opposite / across
from)
4)
Where is the supermarket? (next to / opposite / across
from)
5)
How can I get to the bank? (next to)
Assessment Objectives (Achievement TESTS)
The previous tests shown are based on specific
evaluation criteria. Thus, the objectives of both of them are the following:
1) Test
1 (Reading):
§ To
assess discrete units
§ To
benefit from integrative language, i.e. language in a context, to be able to
achieve understanding of discrete units
§ To
be able to understand the overall idea of texts as well as specific sentences
within it by benefiting from “Anaphoric Reference”, i.e. words which refer back
to another word.
§ To
recognize which words have certain “replacement words” or “deictics” that
replace them within the text.
2) Test
2 (Speaking):
§ To
assess discrete units (Item 1)
§ To
assess integrative language (Item 2)
§ To
understand lexical phrases and be able to distinguish among them according to
the particular communicative context.
§ To
use lexical phrases for communicative functions such as “Directions”.
Discussion of the rationale
We would like to refer to Anne Lennon’s (2012,
p. 19) quotation that says “tests are not normally watertight representations
of one generation of testing, normally techniques are mixed and matched.”
Therefore, taking that into account, it cannot be avoided that, even though the
tests shown here are inspired by one generation, which clearly is the third
generation of tests, there is always some kind of eclecticism in them. Above
all, this happens when multiple choice exercises from test 1 and exercise 1
from test 2 are used since there is no ambiguous answer in them.
After the statements above, it is impossible to
avoid saying that, based on Harris and McCann (1994), both the reading and the
speaking tests are considered as “tests” due to their formal testing nature. In
the same sense, they are kinds of internal formal assessment as they are
invigilated by the same EFL teacher who teaches the class English. Also, they
carry a mark achieved out of a specific score. Thus, based on Scriven (1967, p.
43), tests 1 and 2 presented in this assignment belong to summative assessment.
Moreover, according to purpose (Lennon, A.,
2012), the reading and speaking tests can be classified as achievement tests as
they are both proctored during a course and after a certain amount of syllabus
content. Being they large scale tests, the reading tests assess abilities
related to reference in the discourse organization of reading comprehension of
texts –real samples of language-, whereas the speaking test evaluates
functional language related to directions which students have practiced through
–about– 5 lessons before sitting for the examination.
Even though these third generation tests assess
integrative language or discrete language units within a communicative context,
their scoring procedure is both objective and criterion-referenced (Lennon,
2012) since students are given a score based on their own particular
performances. Nonetheless, the second item in the speaking test is not as
objective as the rest of the items of both tests because different examiners
could give students deviant scores focused on, eventually, not so well built
sentences in terms of grammar. Actually, the deviant scores might go from 1 to
4 points for not fully correct answers, i.e. answers which have the required
prepositions but the sentences they are within have some grammar mistakes.
Moreover, it could be said that both tests are
reliable although the reading test is much more reliable than the speaking test
due to the kind of subjective nature of its second item. Therefore, the reading
test has both high inter-rater and intra-rater reliability, whereas the
speaking one may have an especially deviant inter-rater reliability as
different examiners could give students different scores in item 2. However, since
the latter is less reliable than the rest of the items of both tests, it is
supposedly more valid if we focus on Lennon’s theory (2012).
Regarding West’s Fundamental Principles of
Testing (1990), the tests shown in this assignment, as they have contextualised
language within communicative contexts, they measure performance rather than
competence. We would dare say that, since performance is in nature unsystematic
(Chomsky, 1965), that is what can really be given a particular score based on
students’ answers. Also, since communicative competence is what matters in
Third Generation Tests, then performance is what must be given importance
(Lennon, 2012). Also, since questions are based on particular communicative
contexts, language use rather than language usage is what is given primary
importance in the tests shown (Widdowson, 1978). In the same fashion, this
Chomsky’s performance (1965) and/or Widdowson’s language use (1978) evaluated
in the tests is an example of Direct Assessment (West, 1990).
Notwithstanding all what has previously been
said, it is hard to state whether discrete points – or discrete language units-
and integrative language are mutually exclusive in both the reading and the
speaking tests. In fact, in the whole reading test and item 1 of the speaking
test, the type of scoring has both high reliability, but we cannot deny the
communicative context those questions are taken from. That way, it could be
said there is some kind of eclecticism or mixture in the tests. In order to
reinforce this idea, we would like to refer to Weir’s comments (1993). He talks
about Davies’s concern (1978) because, in his survey article, which looked back
on the 1970’s, it was mainly the how of testing what really mattered,
i.e., discrete items instead of integrative formats. 1988 state-of-the-art
article, by Skehan, is concerned primarily with the what of testing in
the language teaching context. Also, the focus in the 90’s will remain like
that. Therefore, what really matters is evaluating integrative language, i.e.
language within a communicative context rather than how it will be evaluated as
in the case of multiple choice questions in test 1 and prepositions taken out
of a box in item 1 of test 2.
Following West’s principles (1990), the reading
test assesses a receptive skill –reading-, whereas the speaking test evaluates
a productive one. Also, as both of them are achievement tests (Lennon, 2012),
they are a type of backward-looking assessment in the sense that the evaluate
language as part of a syllabus on a course. Nevertheless, they could also be a
forward-looking kind of assessment since the evaluation of integrative language
may account for students’ communicative competence (Hymes, 1972) in the target
language to be used at a future time.
CONCLUSION
Even though, it is not easy to devise evaluation
exercises for the assessment of discrete units (language out of context) and
integrative language (language within a context), the current EFL teacher must
strive to make that come true. So, we must benefit from Third Generation tests
which are based on the Communicative Language Teaching Approach since they aim
at showing how much a student can do with language. But, that is not all.
Requirements still focus on knowledge of the language, even those ones of some international
examinations such as TOEFL. Therefore, Second Generation tests are not
old-fashioned as they can actually help us evaluate that necessary aspect of
language learning, i.e. knowledge.
That is why we would dare focus on Third Generation
Tests only inasmuch as the Post-Method Era is actually replacing Communicative
Language Teaching and this new trend expects us to be both communicative and
eclectic if language knowledge is to be assessed.
REFERENCES
Chomsky,
N. “Aspects of the Theory of Syntax”, in Bachman (1990). 1965.
Davies,
A. “Language Testing. Survey Article part 1 and 2”. Language Teaching and
Linguistics abstracts, II., 1978, pp. 145-59 and 215-31.
Harris,
M & McCann, P. Assessment. Oxford: Heinemann, 1994.
Hymes,
D. “On Communicative Competence”. In: J.B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds) Sociolinguistics.
Selected Readings. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972, pp. 269-293. (Part 2)
Kumaravadivelu,
B. Beyond Methods: Macrostrategies for Language Teaching. Yale
University, 2003.
Lennon, A. Assessment and Testing in the Classroom.
FUNIBER, 2012.
Scriven, M. “The Methodology of Evaluation” in Perspectives of
Curriculum Evaluation. AERA monograph series on curriculum evaluation. Rand
McNally, 1967.
Skehan, P. “Language Testing: Survey Article, Part 1”. Language
Teaching Abstracts, 22, pp. 1-13. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1988.
Weir, C. Understanding and Developing Language Test. Hemel
Hempstead: Prentice Hall International, 1993.
West, R. Introduction and Principles of Language Testing.
University of Manchester SEDE, 1990.
Widdowson,
H. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1978.
