Routledge Introductions to Applied Linguistics Series editors: Ronald Carter, Professor of Modern English Language, University of Nottingham, UK Guy Cook, Chair of Language in Education, King’s College London, UK Routledge Introductions to Applied Linguistics isa series of introductory level, textbooks covering the cote topic in Applied Linguistics, primarily designed for chose entering postgraduate studies and language professionals eerarning oacademic study. The books take an innovative ‘practice to theory" approach, with a ‘backe-to-front’ structure. This leads the reader fcom real-world probleme and itues, chrough a discussion of incervention and how to engage ‘ith chese concerns, befoce finally relating these practical issues co theoretical Foundations. Additional features include tasks with commentacies, a glossary ‘of key corms and an annotated farther reading section Exploring English Language Exploring Professional Teaching, Communication Language in Action Language in Action Graham Hall Stephanie Schnurr Exploring Classroom Discourse Exploring Language Pedagogy Language in Action through Second Language Steve Walch Acquisition Research Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani Exploring Corpus Linguistics Language in Action Exploring Vocabulary Winnie Cheng Language in Action Dee Gardner Exploring World Englishes Language in 2 Global Context Exploring Intercultural Philip Seargeant Communication Language in Action Exploring Health Zhu Hua Communication Language in Action Kevin Harvey and Nelya Koteyko Exploring Language Assessment and Testing Language in Action Anthony Green Exploring Language Assessment and Testing Language in Action Anthony Green yrernneteion J) RoutledgeFes peblished 2014 by Roudedge 2 ark Square, Mkon Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN snd by Rouedge ‘711 Thied Avene, New York, NY 10017 Rouledge i ax imprint ofthe Taplor & Francis Group, an informa business (© 2014 Anthony Green “The right of Anthony Green tobe dented at author of thi work has ben sect bhi in accordnace with sceions 77 and 78 a the Copytight, Designs and Pens Aa 988 Allright reserved, No part ofthis book may be eeprinted a eproiced or usted in 2y form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or beter invented, including photocopying and ecard, ae in any information erage or recieval system, without persion ia writing from the publbes ‘Trademark notice Product or corporate names may be trades or tegisited trademarhs, and sre uted ony for dentifaton an explanation witha intent 0 Infsinge. : British Library Cataloguing Publication Data, ‘catalogue rear for his book is avaiable from the Bish Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Dats Green, Anthony, 1966 plating language assessment sad tet language in ation / Anthony Green, pages cm. ~ (Routledge iteoducsions co applied ings) Inelodes bibliographical seerncer and index. 1. Language and langoages-Abily resin 2. Language and languages-Study and texchig. Tite 753.6675 2014 s16.0076-423 201010140 ISBN: 978-0-415.59723-4 (bk) ISBN; 978-05415-597241 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315.88962.7 eb) “Typeset in Sabon by Saxon Graphics Le, Deby For Richard, Maria and AlexanderContents List of illustrations Permissions Acknowledgements Series editors introduction PARTI 1 Putting language assessment in its place Language as evidence about people “Assessment and testing Purposes for assessment Pueposes for assessment Educational assessment in teaching and learning ‘The practice of language assessment Building quality systems for language assessment Effective assessment comes at a PRICE The assessment cycle The qualicies of effective assessment systems Four qualities of useful assessments Practicality Reliability Validicy Interpretative arguments: assessing the evidence ‘Assessments as maps. Beneficial consequences ‘Summary: the right tool for the jobContents PARTI. 5 Assessing receptive skills Defining reading and listening abilities Specifications “Assessing grammar and vocabulary Preparing items for assessing reading and listening Trying out material Scoring performance Score reporting and feedback Standard setting 6 Assessing productive and interactive skills Defining productive and interactive language abilities Purposes for assessment Assessment design Speaking tasks Task review Trying out material Scoring performance Score reporting and feedback Standard setting iplication and divicion: trends in language assessment Introduction. ‘Whar to test? Constructs ‘The psycholinguistie-soci Tnxegeative testing ‘The mastery learning movement ‘Two approaches to score interpretation Pragmatic tests and the unitary competence hypothesis ‘The ‘promised land’ of communicative testing Rapprochement: communicative language ability Developments in formative assessment Assessment wars: teacher assessment versus external tests Ethical and critical language assessment Highes, wider, deeper: some emerging tzends in language Last words inguistic phate 8 "Commentary on selected tasks 9s 7 98 106 110 uh us 17 1s 3 27 127 135 135 138 140 342 342 158 160 169 7 v7 173, 184 188 192 194 196 198 202 206 21n 214 216 220 224 i . ititntatit Glossary 227 Further Reading 244 References 249 Index 260Illustrations Figures 3.1 The assessment cycle: roles, responsibilities and documentation 3.2. The assessment production cycle 4.1 Assessment qualities 42. Distribution of scores awarded to a Latin composition by 28 expert raters 4.3. inferential bridges in the interpeeration of assesement results 4.4 Washback causes and effects 4.5 The ancient water clock: a simple feedback system Soi Types of reading based on Urquhart and Weit (1998) 5.2 An outline model of receptive language processing based on Weir (2005a) and Field (2008) 5.3 Exploting the Arctic (sample reading test material) ‘5.4 Versane Pro ~ Writing (sample test material) 6.1 A simplified model of language production 62. Interaction in the oral proficiency interview (OPI) 63 Interaction in the semi-direct or computer-based oral proficiency interview (SOPUCOPD 6.4. Interaction in the paired/group speaking assessment 6.5 “Example of a simple four-level EBB scale for ‘essay writing based on Upshur and Turner 6.6 Writing Task 1 from Versant Pro ~ Writing 67 Writing Task 2 from the Pearson Test of English, General: Level 3 6.8 Speaking Task 1 from Cansbridge English: Movers 69. Speaking Task 2 from the Versant Aviation English Test 6.10 Speaking Task 3 from Cambridge English: Business 7.1 Auditory comprehension 7.2 Sample items from the TOEFL test (from 1976), ‘Listening Comprehension’ 7.3. Phonetic contrast the test talcer hears: “Let me see the sheep” 27 2 38 n 83 87 90 99 101 126 128 138 139 139 154 161 163, 164 465 167 183, 184 186 { Musteations 7.4 Sample items from che ELTS Specimen Materials booklet 201 73. The Bachman model of language knowledge 203 Tables 3.1 An example table of specification 34 3.2. Stages of the assessment cycle 36 4.1. Practical considecations in the assessment cycle 62 4.2. Characteristics of assessees 6 4.3. Inferential bridges: steps in building a validity argument for a test of language in the workplace 84 4.4 Chacacteristics of effective feedback 32 6.1 Features of more and less proficient speech 331 6.2. A basic checklist for assessing short interview tasks 144 6.3 A-simple rating scale 145, 6:4 holistic scale: the TOEFL Independent Writing Scale 147, 6.5 Qualitative aspects of spoken language use 148 6.6 Comparison berween holistic and analytic scoring approaches 150 6.7 Differences between ability and bebaviour-focused scales 151 7-1 Phases (or tendencies) in language assessment 174 7.2 The format of the 1913 version of the Certificate of Proficiency in English 175, 7.3. Grid for measuring language abilities from Carroll (1961) 179. 74 The 1964 TOEFL 183, 7.5 The design of the ELTS est 200 76 The TOEEL iBT and 2012 IELTS tests compared 205 7-7 interventionist and interactionist assessment for leacning 208,Permissions ‘The publishers and 1 would like to thank the following copyright holders for permission to reprint material “The Educational Testing Service for the sample listening item from the TOEIG test on p. 126, sample items from the TOEFL test (1976) ‘on p. 184 and for the TOEFL Independent Writing Seale on p. 147. Al other information contained within this publication is provided by Routledge. No endorsement of any kind by Educational Testing, Serviee-should be inferced (Oxford Univecsity Press for extracts fcom Oxford Applied Linguistics: Language Assessment in Practice by Lyle Bachman and Adrian Palmer (2010). ‘Taylor and Francis for extracts from ‘Evolution ofa test item’ by Mary Spaan from Language Assessment Quarterly, vol 4, issue 3 (2007), srww.informaworld.com. Pearson Education Led for extracts feom Language Testing: The Construction and Use of Foreign Language Tests by Robert Lado (1961) and sample items from the Pearson Test of English General. Pearson Education Inc. for extracts feom the Versant Pro Writing Test (2012) and Versant Aviation English Test (2012). ‘Cambridge English Language Assessment for extracts from Examining Speaking: Research and Practice in Assessing Second Language Speaking edited by Lynda Taylor (2011); IELTS Washback in Context: Preparation for Academic Writing in Higher Education by Anthony Green (2007); Preliminary English Test Information for Candidates (2006); Cambridge Young Learners Tests Sample Papers (2010) Cambridge English Business English Certificates Handbook for Teachers (2012); Continuity ‘and Innovation: Proficiency in English Examination 1913-2002 edited by Cyril Weir and Michael Milanovie (2003). i Permissions ‘The British Councit for extracts from English Language Testing Service Specimen Materials Booklet (1987). ‘The Language Policy Division of the Council of Europe for the scale for ‘Qualitative aspects of spoken language use’ from the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (2001). thas not always been possible to identify the sources ofall the material used and in such cases the publishers would weleome information ‘from the copyright holders. aEAcknowledgements ‘This book would never have been possible without the inspiration, help and support of many people. First, Lam very grateful to the series editors, Ronald Carter and Gay Cook, for giving me the opportunity and for their encouragement and advice. Thanks also to Emma Hudson, Sophie Jaques and Andrea Service at Routledge for their enthusiastic help in guiding the book along ro publication, ‘My thanks also go to Nick Saville, John Field and Liz Hamp-Lyons, and to other anonymous reviewers who read all or parcof the manuscript land offered insightful suggestions; co Cyril Weir, Roger Hawkey and Barry O'Sullivan who have done much to shape my ideas on language assessment; to Lynda Taylor, Fumiyo Nakatsubara, Sathena Chan, ‘Stephen Bax and Rebecca Selvaratnam 2t the University of Bedfordshire for their support; t0 Jin Yan, Masashi Negishi, Alan Davies, Dianne ‘Wall, Caroline Browne, colleagues involved in the ProSET project, especially Natalia Bucenina and Olga Safonkinas and to the many ‘others who have helped with enquiries or suggestions, My thanks also ‘must go to the wider community of language educators and assessment prolessionals around the world whom this book has drawn from. Tam, of course, indebted zo my doctoral students, especially Carolyn Westbrook and Daniel Waller, and the many other students and trainees over the years, t00 many to mention by name, who have raised those difficult or unanswerable questions that have helped me to refine ‘my thinking. T very much appreciate the people and institutions thac have contributed or helped me to source materials and co tack down copyright holders. Special thanks are due to Martin Eayrs, to Alist van Moere of Pearson Knowledge Technologies, Ed Hackere and Alison Sharpe at Oxford University Press, Fiona Barker and Jobn. Savage at Cambridge English, Eileen Tyson, Xiaoming Xi and Anthony Ostrander at the Educational Testing Service. ‘Of course, involvement in a project like this leads to the neglect of other commitments and adds to the burdens of others. The book would never have been possible without the patience and unfailing support of my family. Thanks are especially due to Sachiyo not only for taking on all the extra chores, but for encouraging me throughout. Series editors’ introduction ‘The Introductions to Applied Linguistics series ‘This series provides clear, authoritative, up-to-date overviews of the ‘major areas of applied linguistics. The books are designed particularly for students embarking on Masters level ot teacher-education courses, as well as students in the closing stages of undergraduate study. The practical focus will make the books particularly useful and relevant to those returning to academic study after a period of professional practice, and also to those about to leave the academic world for the Challenges of language-related work. For students who have not previously studied applied linguistics, including those who are tuafamiliae with cuecent academic study in English-speaking universities, the books can act as one-step introductions. For chose with more ‘academic experience, they can also provide a way of surveying, ‘updating and organising existing knowledge. ‘The view of applied linguistics in this series follows a famous definition of the field by Christopher Brumfic (1995: 27) as: “The cheoretical and empirical investigation of real-world problems in which language is a central issue. {In keeping with this broad problem-oriented view, the series will cover 2 cange of topics of relevance to a variety of language-relared professions. While language teaching and learning rightly remain prominent and will be the eenteal preoccupation of many readers, our Eonception of the discipline is by no means limited to these areas. Our view is that while each reader of the series will have cheir own needs, specialities and interests, there is also much to be gained from a broader view of the discipline as a whole. We believe there is much in common between all enquiries into language-related problems in the eal world, and much to be gained from a comparison of the insights from one area of applied linguistics with another. Our hope therefore is that readers and course designers will nox choose only those volumes relating to their own particular interests, but use this series to construct 2 wider knowledge and understanding of che field, and the manySeries editors" introduction crossovers and resonances between its various areas. Thus, the topics to be covered are wide in range, embracing an exciting mixture of established and new areas of applied linguistic enquiry. ‘The perspective on apptied linguistics in this series Inline with his problem-oriented definition of the field, and to address the concerns of teaders who are interested in how academic study can inform their own professional practice, each book follows a structure in marked contrast 0 the usual movement from theory to practice. In this series, this usual progeession is presented back to front. The acgument moves from Problems, through Intervention, and only finally to Theory. Thus each topic begins with a survey of everyday professional problems in the area under consideration, ones which the reader is likely to have encountered. From there it proceeds to a discussion of intervention and engagement with these problems. Only ina final section (either of the chapter or the book as a whole} does the author reflect upon the implications of this engagement for a general understanding of language, drawing out the theoretical implications. We believe this to be atraly applied linguistics perspective, in line with, the definition given above, and one in which engagement with real- ‘world problems is the distinctive feature, and in which professional practice can both inform and draw upon academic understanding. ‘Support to the reader Although it is not the intention that the text should be in any way ‘activity driven, the pedagogic process is supported by measured {guidance to the reader in the form of suggested activities and tasks that raise questions, promp? reflection and seck to integrate theory and practice. Each book also contains a helpful glossary of key terms. ‘The series complements and reflects the Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics, edited by James Simpson, which conceives and ‘categorises the scope of applied linguistics in a broadly similar way. Ronald Carter Guy Cook Reference Brumfic, C. J.(1995) ‘Teacher professionalism and research, in G. Cook and B. Seidlnofer (eds) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford Universcy Press, pp. 27-42. Sories editors’ introductions Note - “There is a section of commentaries on a number of the tasks atthe tack of the book. The (& symbol inthe margin indicates that there is 2 commentary on that 3k:i Part | art lof this book is intended as a practical resource ta help teachers, students, trainees and anyone interested in language education to tunderstand more about the practice of language assessment and testing. A better understanding of the qualities of good assessments and of processes and techniques for improving this should help practising teachers and other educators to make more effective use of assessment in their professional lives. The first two chapcers set out the core functions of language assessments. Chapter 1 outlines what is meant by language assessment and its place in language education. Chapter 2 considers some of the many reasons that people have for assessing. language abilities. It shows how the practice of language assessment needs to be closely linked to the ways in which cesults will be used and interpreted. In ‘educational seztings, this means there_must be an_interdependent ‘relationship between teaching, learning and assessment. ‘Chapter 3 explains a practical and widely applicable approach to building quality assessments for use in the classroom or in testing programmes. Chapter + describes the qualities of useful assessments land ways of evaluating then. These chapters introduce che reader to ways of working that have been shown to improve the quality of assessment materials and procedures. Part Il introduces the reader to rolovant theoretical insights and shows how the processes described in Part I are used in developing tests and assessments. Chapters 5 and 6 offer straightforward guidance fon designing and developing more effective assessments and preparing appropriate materials for the purpose. Supplementary resources on the companion website (www.routledge.com/cw/rial) illustrate the wide range of options open to writers of assessments for learners of all ages and at all stages of language learning Part I introduces the reader to the study of language assessment, ‘racing its emergence asa distinc field of enquiry. Iroutlines developing trends and points to areas of controversy and debate. This aspect of the book not only helps to contexvualise and deepen understanding of the practices described, but opens up avenues for the reader ro explore though farther study.the foes throughout on setng People's billy tose freign, second of adaionl languages and tasone for stying th The feces and tchngucsdesibed apply to che mtament of a Enger, Ssh xp ema ake Gow the abe EAS pad besasemy owm spenecet main ineacing Eafe Bogs burl foci very good enon tats Book itatfereen is Eaglsh and so the expe shoul be secs ‘ites. -ahsial em that are covered in th Gossary ater whee choy Bt apes by bold ype Addiional courses and pect eclcneran Povideon the compan ness rw couledgecom! xia For cach set, fer sources of eadng oe scommendes ert veader who withes to expose the acm ore pe 1 Putting language assessment in its place Personal refiection Wht do you understand by the term language assessment? How ist different from language teaching or language leaming? \Whet doyouthinkare the main ditterences (fary)betweenassessments, tests and examinations’? " ‘What do you understand by the terms language skills, language knowiodge anc language abiltes? ‘Think about an experience you have had of a language test. id you find the experiance enjoyable? Why (or why not)? ‘Do you think that the test helped you to learn the language? How? Language as evidence about people Itis a natural reaction to hearing or ceading any fragment of language to use it as evidence abpuc the person who produced it. When we speak on the telephone to people whom we have not met, we may use the sound of their voice, its accent and pitch to give us clues about whether they are native speakers of our language, which region they come from, their gender, age, social class and profession, and their ‘mood and attitudes. Ti seems that we can’t help forming an’ opinion about people) according to the kind of language they produce. In Britain, surveys of ‘customers of telephone call centces investigating attitudes towards accents show that British people tend to associate American accents with high levels of success, Scottish accents with trustworthiness, and the accents of people who come from large cities such as London, Liverpool and Birmingham with low levels of both (The Yorkshire Post, 2006), These attitudes may be unreasonable, but we are more likely to listen to and believe messages delivered by voices that we find pleasing and trustworthy. Businesses know this and catefully choose actors with suitable accents to deliver their advertising messages.“iy Part! Lfwe receive alter or email from someone, we base similar judgements on their choice of words and written style. We may even begin to form fdeas about cheie appearance and personality. As you read this, you are probably already building up a picture in your mind of the writer of this Books When you do this kind of thing, you are using the language that a person produces to make inferences or draw conclusions about them. Linguistic evideace can sometimes be used quite formally to give insights into a person's identity or personality. Experts in forensic linguistics often try to establish where a suspect comes from by studying hig or her accent or speech patterns. Sometimes employers look at che size and shape of job applicanes’ handwriting because this is supposed fo give insights into their pecsonalties. However, these Kinds of inferences about people's regional origins or characteristics are not tioually wat is implied by the term language assessment, In this book the foeus is on assessments where knowledge about language, the ability to wre language or skill in applying these are measured or evaluated. In everyday life, we not only make judgements about people on the basis of how they use language; we also make judgements about the ‘qualities of the language that they use. We notice when they make grammatical errors or choose an inappropriate word; when they Sppear impolite or overly formal; when they aze very hesitant wher they are being unclear or imprecise or, on the other hand, when they Seem to express their ideas particularly well. We also judge our own tise of language. AS We speak or write, we monitor and correct ‘ourselves. We put right our slips of the tongue and fix our spelling mistakes (with or without che help of our word processing software); Se rephrase the things we say if people misunderstand us; we reorganise Dar arciteen texts fo try to make our ideas clearer to out readers. * "The nature of the knowledge, skills and al ‘and using a language is a matter of debate. An introduction to some of the contentious issues that have excited language assessment specialists js given in Part Ill. Briefly, knowledge about language may include secogais ‘written in a foreign language and knowing a Teeedlation equivelene (bird in English can be translated as is in ‘Krabie, Si in Chinese or Vogelin German), or knowing.s grammatical rule: the past participle in English eegular verbs is formed by adding ied to the stem: look ~ looked), or lenowing pragmatic conventions. For example, in most circumstances How are you? spoken by an acquaintance is likely to be intended as a conventional greeting. The anticipated response might be, Good. You rather than details of the other's felings or of any medical conditions "A distinetion is often made ia language education following Hiymes (1972) between knowledge of the rules governing language asa system and the abilixy co actually_uee language jn_untchearsed snsta=son Learners may know a good deal about a language, but be unable to Putting language assessment in its place access the words or phrases they know in the course of « conversation Sr be unable 0 pronounce them accurately. Conversely, many people Ste able to communicate effectively in a wide cange of situations with irele or no explicit knowledge of the systems of rules thae govern the language they ase using. “anauaatal ingoluedawing on language) knowledge and language abilities in ocder to read, liste eal, Soiree th oilers, orto mediate besteen them. ‘The evidence we have of a person using a language may be very limited ~ a few telephone conversations and a handful of emails, pariaps ~ but based on what we observe in these few instances, we Bieen make inferences about their more general knowledge of @ language, their ability to use the language and their skill in-canrying lout language-telated aI) We may hear them speak for just a few minutes: but reach conisions such as: ‘Adel knows moce Albanian than Ido" o¢ Bonita can get by in Bengal. We see a few examples of theie weiting and we make statements such as: ‘Carole can write very {polished business letters in Chinese’ or ‘Dai finds it really dificult to form questions in Danish’. “The major focus of this book willbe onthe use of language assessment +" in educational contexs. This sctng for languay al is-dome impottane ways. Firstly, language teachers, unlike most of us, ai SEM} Cxpected to voice theie judgements about other people's language use and are generally rewarded (rather than resented) for pointing out and correcting errors. f you have worked as a language teacher, you will probably have experience during the natural course of any lesson of deciding whether one of your students has produced Sccurate and appropriae language, aad perhaps putting right mistakes they have made of asking them e0 ay again, You have probably aed them to read of listen to a text in the foreiga language and then asked them questions abouti¢to cheek their understanding. As {define anguage assessment in this book, examples can range fcom informal classroom activites ro well-known national and international language tess So, here isa simple definition: “The evidence comes fcom the performance of tasks that involve the use of language. The inferences are what we interpret the performance to mean based on our beliefs about che nature of language and its role in thedlife of che parson being assessed. The inferences we make about assessees (the term T will use inthis book for the people being assessed) are_generally used to_inform fecisiond — decisions that can range in magnitude feom whether it Would be berter for them to use another comma in a sentence oF Language assessment involves obtaining evidenceto inform inferences] « ‘about a person's language-related knotwledge, skills or abilities.sel ory Part pactce saying a certain phase again, 1 whether they shouldbe give i ob or permived to make thee Home ina certain country. Tn lsequage education, teacher taining programmes tend to give assessment athe lide atenion. Assessments often the tops of usta ita sesions apparently an sue of lle direct concern to the teacher, erhaps beter itt expert specialists On the other hance sometimes Troma to ake on overtiding importance inthe lve of teachers and Icamnecs Many school cidren,iasked why they are learning foreign language, would answer that they ate doing it mainly to pass a public tart often Keown as an examination, Most language teachers spend a ocd deal of tm assessing thee sents and, especially when che day aean important national examination is getting close, many dedicate tnost oftheir asses to preparing thet tudent o fake thes te, 1 f tn chs book | argue tat language assessment i inseparable from 1} ane caching and Cacing of Mapeage This chlleogee Me-more traditional view in teacher education that assessment is a distinct Sctiviys one thet is marginal tO the rain business of the language w, teachers need to develop what is sometimes called sessment literacy) They not only need to_undecstand Something abba Rov Inhaoge aselomeats ack rade bred and tterpeted by Srhers, Bog alse te bs able to make, score ail misegeg The CUTS of reat themselves: Experience suggests that low levels of fr icad to bed educational decisions and. 10 teaching and learning that are less effective than they could be. Assessment and testing “The traditional view that separates assessment from teaching may resule from the identification of the word assessinent with the narcower activity of testing. A test is an event that is especially set up to elicit a performance (usually within a predetecmined time frame} for the purpose of making judgements about a person’s knowledge, skills or abilities. In the course of a language test the person being judged (the ‘assessee ~a ‘test taker, ‘testee’ or ‘candidate’) will respond co a prompt (eags an essay ttle; questions asked by an interviewer, a set of choices ‘on a test paper). The rest taker's response is judged or scored according. roa mack scheme. This is a predetecmined procedure such as identifying and calculating the proportion of correct answers: 14 out of 20; ‘counting the number of errors in a piece of writing; assigning points or marks to an essay to match descriptions presented on a scale, etc. The outcome is a score or grade, which is chen formally cecorded. The formalities and rituals of formal testing and the penalties associated ‘with failure can make them an intimidacing experience forthe test taker. For some commentators, assessment is distinguished from testing. because it covers a much broader eycle of activities. In addition to the Putting language assessment ints place test event (which involves eliciting a performance as evidence of language abilities), these activities include: + deciding on the content of che test, ++ scoring the performance; ‘+ deciding on the meaning of the scares obtained; + decisions that the scores are used ro justify (such as choosing which students toadmitontoa course or deciding whether to awardcerificates). In this view, the testis just one step in a sequence of events which together make up a cycle of assessment, This assessment cycle will be discussed in more derail in Chapter 3. From another point of view, the word ‘testing’ can refer to-this entize cycle of assessment events, but tests are understood to make upa relatively small set of controlled procedures among a much broader range of ‘options. Assessmect is a more general term than testing and rakes in many different methods of obeaining and evaluating language data, including, less formal procedures with fewer controls and restrictions than tests. ‘While it can be helpful to cemind ourselves that assessment involves 1a whole cycle of inter-related activities, it is the second of these distinctions ~ the range of options for obtaining information ~ that is more often made in discussions of language assessment and so is the cone used in this book. In contrast to tests, other forms of assessment may involve such + informal questioning in class by teachers; semi-formal exercises and quizzes carried out in class; learners reflecting on their own use of language self-assessment; learners judging each other’s performance ~ peer assessment; the collection of samples of language that have not been elicited according to any fixed or formal plan, Examples of this include ‘observations and some forms of portfolio assessment. Observations involve teachers watching and recording student performance in classroom activities. Portfolios are collections of student work that may showcase their best achievements or represent ‘progress over a period of time. GE SNE FePart! ‘Assessment, teaching and learning ‘There are a number of different strategies we can use when we learn shew skill from another person. Perhaps the simplese of these is | Fmtation: one person, the learner, watches what another person docs fand then attempts i for him or herself. When animals leaca skills, this, generally appears to be how they do it. We know that some Ehimpanzees, for example, can learn how fo carry. out quite | Sophisticated ras, such a8 using a stick as @ tool ro catch insects, by Copying the actions of other members of their group. They carefully Observe what the skilled chimpanzee does, recognising that one set of Scrions ~ such as shaping a stick — is related ro another ~ poking the Stick inco a tee trunk ~ and that these actions together bring a reward ae} meal of insects. They then ty to recreate the same series of actions hemselves co get the same ceward. Chimpanzees are very good at imitation and they often perform better than humans in carcying out Jncricate imitation tasks. ‘Assessment of this kind of learning can be steaightforward. Combining imitation with a process of trial and error, learners either succeed in accomplishing the task, or repeatedly fail and eventually give up. ‘though ie is possible to build knowledge by observing and copying, imitation alone is a limited way of passing on skills, nd the rove complex the skill, the less effective imitation seems to be. A child ‘can watch an adult driving a car and try to copy the movements she Secs, but that will probably not make her a safe and effective driver | hen she has the chance to take the wheel. When learning a language, Tan try to imitate the sounds that speakers of that language make, t0 fnemorise words and grammatical patterns; but that is not likely 0 be | enough to enable me to communicate effectively. i i Putting language assessment in ite place Learning complex skills like these is much more effective if we understand something about by people perform certain actions and how those actions help them to accomplish the tasks chey want to carry oUt, This level of understanding is easier to achieve if we have fmnother person to teach us. Tn order to teach, people need both co understand that others can’t do what they themselves can do, and to be motivated to pass on theit ‘own knowledge. When a person has masteced a new skill, they often Share their newfound ability not only by showing ~ inviting others to watch as they perform the skill ~ or telling ~ explaining to the learners how to do it = but also by attending to the learners and judging how wel they have understood and how close they are to being able to arty out the task independently. ‘Human learners do aot usually simply imitate their teaches, but actively try to make sense of what they are learaing: not only to notice that carrying out a sequence of actions leads to a particular outcome, but to understand why it does so. The teacher can-sipport the learner by observing the learncr’s efforts and providing feedback: pointing out what they aze doing well and what they are doing poorly in ordet fo help them to improve. As humans, our willingness to teach each bother in this way is one epason why we are 20 much more efficient than animals at preserving and developing our collective knowledge and technologies. ‘Understanding the gap between what learners can do now and what they need t0 be able to do or understand in order to fulfil a task saccesafully requires a sophisticated awareness both of the task and the learner. Inthe case of language learning, learners need to build an tnderstanding of low people can use language to accomplish tasks such a¢ establishing 2 rapport with another person, buying clothes or getting theie haircut. Assessment chat takes account of this requires tore than simple judgements of success or failure ‘Az well as having a good mastery ofthe skill herself, and the ability to model the skill in ways thac make it more accessible ro the learner, the good reacher breaks down complex skillsico the different elements that contribute to success. The teacher recogaises which of these the learners are able to do independenely, which they can do with some help ot prompting, and which remain well beyond their abilities. The teacher may allow learners to carry out parts of a task that they are already able to accomplish, but offer help with the more challenging stages, Think of how a mother might help a child to assemble a model orcook a meal, leting the child carry outthe ask, but asking questions, pointing out mistakes, perhaps actually carzying out some of the most complex steps in the process herself before asking the child to try to replicate what she has done, giving feedback ae the same time on what the child is doing well and how he might do better. 9