TRABAJO DE LA ASIGNATURA:

Assignment - ATC

SUBJECT ASSIGNMENT:ASSESSMENT AND TESTING IN THE CLASSROOMTUTOR:ANTONIO BUENO STUDENT:

VILMA ROSIBEL MRQUEZ DE CHICASFILE NAME: 2012-06 VMrquez_A&TDUE DATE: January 19th, 2014.INDEX

1.0 Introduction.. 5

1.1Objectives of the Designed Test 5 1.1.1 Specified Objectives for listening or reading . .51.1.2 Specified Objectives for speaking or writing.52.0 theoretical Basis of the Test6 2.1 Type of Test According to Purpose6 2.2 Second or Third Generation Test6 2.3 Fundamental Principles of Language Testing..6

2.3.1 Competence vs. Performance6

2.3.2 Usage vs. Use..7

2.3.3 Direct/Indirect Assessment.7

2.3.4 Discrete point vs. Integrative Assessment7

2.3.5 Objective vs. Subjective Assessment7

2.3.6 Receptive vs. Productive Skills..8

2.3.7 Backward -and Forward- looking Assessment...8

2.3.8 Contextualized vs. Disembodied Language.8

2.3.9 Criterion referenced and Norm-referenced Assessment9

2.3.10 Reliability vs. Validity.9 3.0 Scales and Instructions for marking the Test..10 4.0 Test Formats Elected for the particular skill12 5.0 Conclusions..12.. Bibliography

.. Appendices SUBJECT ASSIGNMENT:ASSESSMENT AND TESTING IN THE CLASSROOMGENERAL INFORMATION:

This assignment has to fulfil the following conditions:

Length: between 8 and 10 pages (without including cover, index or appendices if there are any-).

Type of font: Arial or Times New Roman. Size: 11.

Line height: 1.5.

Alignment: Justified.

The assignment has to be done in this Word document and has to fulfil the rules of presentation and edition, as for quotes and bibliographical references which are detailed in the Study Guide.

Also, it has to be submitted following the procedure specified in the Study Guide. Sending it to the tutors e-mail is not permitted.

In addition to this, it is very important to read the assessment criteria, which can be found in the Study Guide.

The assignment mark is 100% of the final mark, but the participation in the activities performed during the tutorials can improve this mark.Assignment:You should devise a formal progress or achievement test for assessing language learning outcomes of:

Specified objectives in either listening or reading.

Specified objectives in either speaking or writing (you must specify the objectives).

The instrument should be justified in relation to its theoretical basis. The test should aim to test the communicative use of language and will therefore include integrative techniques, although these might be objectively or subjectively marked as you feel appropriate. Items which test knowledge of discrete items of grammar and lexis may also be included if you think it is appropriate. The rationale should minimally include discussion of the following:

The type of test according to purpose (see unit 2).

Whether the test could be considered second, or third generation.

Discussion of the principles of language testing as outlined in Unit 3, in relation to the test you design.

Discussion of relevant scales and instructions for marking the test.

Discussion of why you have chosen the test formats elected for the particular skill.

Note: You are expected to devise a (i.e. write your own) test. Do not use an already written test from other sources, and please note that plagiarised tests will be given a fail grade.

Important: you have to write your personal details and the subject name on the cover (see the next page). The assignment that does not fulfil these conditions will not be corrected. You have to include the assignment index below the cover.

1 IntroductionIn Language Learning many are the factors that affect the actual learning of any given language: context, culture, age, syllabus, teachers role, students role, etc. But there is a common factor among these variables that is always present in the process; and that factor is assessment. As defined by Wingard 81: 171, assessment is any means of checking what students can do with language (in Funiber, p. 4). In order to monitor students learning, different types of assessment can be used: informal assessment, formal assessment and self-assessment.

In this document, I have decided to devise a test for my students majoring Bachelors Degree in English at Universidad Gerardo Barrios in the city of San Miguel, El Salvador. I will make use of formal assessment, interpreting it as a type of test administered in class by the teacher, which is intended to measure my students progress in real language use by testing productive as well as receptive skills.1.1 Objectives of the Designed TestThe test I have designed intends to measure my students progress on productive and receptive skills and the objectives that I pursue are stated below:1.1.1 Specified Objectives for listening or reading Students will be able to understand listening activities and answer listening comprehension questions. Students will be able to read and complete missing words in an authentic text.1.1.2 Specified Objectives for speaking or writing

Taking the role of a front desk receptionist in a company, students will be able to write answers to requests posed by customers via phone call.

Taking the role of a front desk receptionist, learners will be able to respond to a customer (teacher) requesting information about the services of the company.2 Theoretical Basis of the Test2.1 Type of Test According to Purpose

The purpose of the test I have devised for my students taking the subject Business English at Universidad Gerardo Barrios in El Salvador is a type of progress test designed in order to assess the effectiveness of my students learning about the last unit we have studied in the textbook we are using (On the Job).2.2 Second or Third Generation TestThe progress test I have devised is categorized as a Third Generation one since it tests integrative language and contains items of real language use such as: authentic reading, writing phone messages notes for the corresponding addressee, answering a phone call and giving the information requested by the customer.

2.3 Fundamental Principles of Language TestingLanguage testing has its principles. According to West (1990), tests can be categorized according to different pairs of principles. These pairs indicate opposition between them. (in Funiber, p.21) 2.3.1 Competence vs. PerformanceThe test that I have devised is intended to assess the progress of students taking one of the subjects that belong to ESP, Business English. Hence, all the tasks that students perform in the classroom are based on real life situations; moreover, it is necessary to assess by using a communicative test. Furthermore, this test is intended to go beyond competence to a more concrete and useful stage: Performance. As stated before, this instrument belongs to the third generation of tests, and, as mentioned by Ms. Anne Lennon in Funiber (p.22), Third generation testing is often called performance testing.2.3.2 Usage vs. UseIn Widdowsons (1978, in Funiber p. 22) point of view, performance testing requires examples of language use rather than language usage. Language users need more than knowing the rules of how a language works; they need to use those rules in real life situations. Hence, this test aims to assess use, which at the same time embodies its usage since the test takers will recur to it in order to succeed on the test.2.3.3 Direct/Indirect Assessment

Lennon (in Funiber, p. 23) mentions that direct tests use examples of performance as an indicator of communicative competence, consequentially, the test has been designed to assess real world language use. In fact, direct assessment fits with performance and use principle of testing given that the learners will perform communicative testing tasks in an integrated way. 2.3.4 Discrete point vs. Integrative Assessment

In communicative assessment, testing items need to combine knowledge of different parts of the language (Funiber, p. 23). An integrative assessment test contains a variety of items to be assessed in different ways, for example: improved multiple choice, multiple matching, dictation, information transfer and cloze procedure. The test therein contained is of an integrative assessment type.

2.3.5 Objective vs. Subjective Assessment

Although it is difficult and time consuming to asses productive skills that require subjective assessment, in the test designed, I included productive as well as receptive skills. As we already know, third generation tests can be assessed through the use of both objective and subjective techniques. In my devised test, the receptive skills (listening and reading) are assessed using objective techniques which allow me to clearly mark an answer as right or wrong; contrary to productive skills that will need subjective techniques to mark.

2.3.6 Receptive vs. Productive Skills

The test designed integrates and assesses receptive skills (listening and reading) as well as productive skills (writing and speaking). Parts I and II of the test will assess receptive skills and the remaining parts III and IV will assess Productive skills. As mentioned above, the skills will be tested with the corresponding objective and subjective techniques. In this way, an integrative and complete assessment is assured.2.3.7 Backward -and Forward- looking Assessment

Although the test has been designed to assess students progress on the last unit studied, the type of assessment best fits with a forward-looking type since it entails different tasks that the learner would probably be required to perform in real life situations, such as working in an office as a front desk assistant. The test results gives a parameter of how the learner would react and act in a possible future circumstance.2.3.8 Contextualized vs. Disembodied LanguageIn order for an integrative test to function well, it is necessary to clearly provide the context in which it has to be developed. Therefore, the test contains a context that includes details about the communicative purpose, role relationships, channel of communication, etc. (Funiber, p. 24) In the test, the first part, Listening clearly expresses the context, in part II, Reading, students can easily understand the purpose of the activity given to the relevance that it has in relationship to the previous exercise. For the other parts of the test, Writing and Speaking, a context is also provided for students to be able to perform the tasks in an appropriate way. 2.3.9 Criterion referenced and Norm-referenced Assessment

Taking into account that the test has been designed for students from El Salvador, where every educational institution has a Norm-referenced assessment system, I have designed the test in a hybrid way, assessing receptive skills through norm- referenced and the productive skills through criterion referenced. To mark writing items, a band scale will be used and to mark speaking, the instrument will be an analytical scale. However, since in our educational system students have to pass or fail the test, the band scales and the analytical scales criteria of assessment will have their equivalence in numbers from 1 to 10 and then the average of the whole parts of the test will be taken as the final grade.2.3.10 Reliability vs. ValidityDue to the design of the test, which integrates receptive and productive skills, it seems evident that both reliability and validity will be involved at the time of scoring the test. The former skills will be scored objectively and therefore reliability will be present (up to some extent) in parts I and II of the test dissimilar to the latter skills that will be scored subjectively; meeting the requirements of validity. In short, the test has been designed eclectically so that the test can be valid, and at the same time, reliable. Although grading a test like this is a tedious and time consuming task for the teacher, I strongly believe that it is important to do it if we really want to assess communicative tasks including all the skills, just us mentioned in Funiber Assessment and Testing in the Classroom notes (p. 25): chosing not to assess all the skills can be seen as a reduction of the face validity of the test.3 Scales and Instructions for marking the TestIn order to mark the test in Part I and II, Integrative Objective Testing Techniques will be used. Since the first part of the test deals with listening and the items evaluated contain more than one correct choice, the technique used is Improved Multiple Choice. In part II of the test, reading comprehension is being tested through the use of Cloze Procedure Technique where students have to read a text with missing words. To assess writing and speaking, however, subjective techniques will be used. In the case of writing, Band Scales will be used (see figure 1 below). For assessing speaking, we will use Analytic scales (see figure 2 below), which provide a more detailed appreciation of the items tested.

HOLISTIC SCORING RUBRIC (Figure 1)

Analytic Scale for Assessing Speaking

Pronunciation

4 Excellent -- No consistent or conspicuous mispronunciation; approaches native-like pronunciation with good intonation and juncture.

3 Good -- Some identifiable deviations in pronunciation, but with no phonemic errors. Non-native accent evident with occasional mispronunciations that do not interfere with understanding.

2 Fair -- Identifiable deviations in pronunciation with some phonemic errors. Non-native accent requires careful listening, and mispronunciations lead to occasional misunderstanding.

1 Poor -- Frequent pronunciation errors with a heavy non-native accent. Many phonemic errors that make understanding difficult.

Fluency

4 Excellent -- Speech is effortless and smooth with speed that approaches that of a native speaker.

3 Good -- Speech is mostly smooth but with some hesitation and unevenness caused primarily by rephrasing and groping for words.

2 Fair -- Speech is slow and often hesitant and jerky. Sentences may be left uncompleted, but speaker is able to continue, however haltingly.

1 Poor -- Speech is very slow and exceedingly halting, strained, and stumbling except for short or memorized expressions. Difficult for a listener to perceive continuity in utterances and speaker may not be able to continue.

Grammar/Language Use

4 Excellent -- Very strong command of grammatical structure and some evidence of difficult, complex patterns and idioms. Makes infrequent errors that do not impede comprehension.

3 Good -- Good command of grammatical structures but with imperfect control of some patterns. Less evidence of complex patterns and idioms. Limited number of errors that are not serious and do not impede comprehension.

2 Fair -- Fair control of most basic syntactic patterns. Speaker always conveys meaning in simple sentences. Some important grammatical patterns are uncontrolled and errors may occasionally impede comprehension.

1 Poor -- Any accuracy is limited to set or memorized expressions; limited control of even basic syntactic patterns. Frequent errors impede comprehension.

Vocabulary

4 Excellent -- Very good range of vocabulary with evidence of sophistication and native-like expression. Strong command of idiomatic expressions. Infrequent use of circumlocution because particular words are rarely lacking.

3 Good -- Good range of vocabulary with limited evidence of sophistication. Some expressions distinctly non-native but always comprehensible. Limited evidence of idiomatic expressions. Speaker is comfortable with circumlocution when lacking a particular word.

2 Fair -- Adequate range of vocabulary with no evidence of sophistication. Some distinctly non-native expressions or errors in word choice may impede comprehension. No evidence of idiomatic expressions. Speaker has difficulty with circumlocution when lacking a particular word.

1 Poor -- Limited range of vocabulary. Lack of repertoire and frequent errors in word choice often impede comprehension. Speaker shows no attempt at circumlocution when lacking a particular word.

To score the students performance, the teacher circles the aspects of language performance into individual scales, giving a profile performance.

Source: http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/assessing/analyticscalepop.htm 4.0 Test Formats Elected for the particular skill

For every skill tested I chose a different scoring technique. As I have already mentioned, the first and second parts of the test will be scored using objective testing techniques. I chose two different formats for these sections of the test: Improved Multiple Choice and Cloze Procedure because in this way mere guessing is reduced and that allows for a more reliable and valid result of the test. On the other hand, the two productive skills writing and speaking will be scored by using carefully designed rubrics. For writing, the holistic or global scales will provide a variety of descriptors for evaluating the writing exercise. Such bands go from 1 to 5, in which effective communication, good communication, passable communication and almost no communication are marked correspondingly. In a similar fashion, the last skill tested will be scored through analytical scales that provide specific and detailed criteria of pronunciation, fluency, grammar, and vocabulary; factors associated to speaking. It is then evident that the selection of these test formats per each skill is due to the meaningfulness and communicative tasks that they provide, letting me administer a valid and reliable test in an integrated way. 5.0 ConclusionsTo sum up, both subjective and objective assessment methods have pros and cons. However, teachers can make a good use of these types of assessment through the integration of both approaches. It is also important to bear in mind that authentic text and real world tasks make of testing a more meaningful and useful experience for learners. The criteria for assessing productive skills as well as receptive skills must be clear when using the so-called third generation tests. Reliability and Validity can be combined whenever a teacher is willing to assess students in all areas, like in the test therein contained. Without a doubt whatsoever, marking scales are of great help to reduce the potential lack of reliability in subjective tests as well as the use of self-assessment instruments to enlighten and heighten learners self-awareness. REFERENCES

1. Lennon, A. (n.d.) Assessment and Testing in the Classroom, FUNIBER.2. West, R. (1990) Introduction and Principles of Language Testing. University of Manchester SEDE.3. Widdowson, H. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.4. Wingard, P. (1981) Assessment in Abbot, G. and Wingard, P. (eds.) The Teaching of English as an International Language. London: Collins.

WEBOGRAPHY

1. Analytic Scale for Assessing Speaking: http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/assessing/analyticscalepop.htm Retrieved on January 15th, 2014.

LIST OF APPENDICESA progress test designed by Vilma Rosibel Mrquez (2014)

UNIVERSIDAD GERARDO BARRIOS

SUBJECT: BUSINESS ENGLISH LEVEL B1 PROGRESS TESTTeachers Name: Vilma Rosibel Mrquez

Students Name:_____________________________ Date:________________

Part I LISTENING (20%)Listen to the following phone calls from customers in different companies. Circle the appropriate answers to each question.1. Caller #1 needs information about

a. Prices of laptops and tablets

b. The president of the company

c. Special offers and discounts

d. Payment ways

e. How to apply for a job

2. Caller #2 is interested in

a. Working at the company

b. Getting a catalog of products offered by the companyc. Talking to the CEO

d. Getting a refund for damaged product

e. Buying cell phones to export

3. What is Caller #3 requesting?

a. Schedules for French courses

b. Schedules for English courses

c. Prices of French courses

d. A and C are correct

e. None of the above is correct

4. What services does the company in listening 4 offer?a. Language courses, translation services

b. Invitation cards, treat bags and boxes

c. Baby clothing, make up supplies, school items

d. Visa application forms filling, tour guides preparation courses

e. B and C are correct

Part II READING (20%)

Rea the following request sent by a customer. Complete the request by choosing the corresponding missing word.

San Miguel, January 4th, 2014(1)_____ Sirs,

I saw (2) _____ advertisement introducing the Doe 600 Plus in the Springfield Journal of June 10. I think your system may (3) ____ just what our company needs. (4)_____ send me more information on the 600 plus or other systems that may be appropriate (5) ____ our needs. We have 90 employees and run our plant 24 hours per day, six days a week.

You could mail the information to me at the above address, or (6) ____ me at 555-5555.

1. a. Manager

b. Company

c. Dear

d. Gentlemen

2. a. his

b. your

c. my

d. yours

3. a. come

b. be

c. understand

d. see

4. a. Perhaps

b. Can

c. Please

d. Offer

5. a. in

b. for

c. because

d. to

6. a. talk

b. speak

c. call

d. write

Part III WRITING (30%)As a front desk receptionist, choose two of the phone calls in exercise 1 and respond to the customers requests.

Part IV SPEAKING (30%)

Take the role of a front desk receptionist in a language school company and answer to a customer (teacher) who is requesting information about the services your company offers.Name and surname(s): Vilma Rosibel Mrquez de ChicasLogin:

Group: Date: January 19, 2014.Adapted from Test For English Major, China,

by Prof. Lourdes Cerezo.

(Figure 2)

Caller #____.

Caller #____.

17