Jumat, 11 November 2016

Materi kelima



ASSESSING LISTENING and ASSESSING READING


OBSERVING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE FOUR SKILL
            Before focusing on listening itself, think about the two interacting concepts of performance and observation. All language users perform the acts of listening. Speaking, reading & writing. They of course rely on their underlying competence in order to accomplish these performances. When you propose to asses that person’s competence, but you observe the person’s performance.

THE IMPORTANCE OF LISTENING
            Listening has often played second fiddle to its counterpart, speaking in the standardized testing industry, a number separate oral production test are available (Test of spoken English, Oral proficiency inventory and phone pass. to name several that are described chapter 7 of this book, but it is rare to find just a listening test. on reason for this emphasis is that listening is often implied as a component of speaking. in addition the overtly observable nature of speaking renders it more empirically measurable than listening.
We therefore need to pay close attention to listening as a mode of performance for assessment in the classroom in this chapter we will begin with basic principals and types listening, than move to a survey of task that can be used to assess listening.

BASIC TYPES of LISTENING       
            Ass all with effective test, designing appropriate assessment tasks in listening begins wait the specification of objectives, or criteria those objective may be classified in term of several types of listening performance.

1. You recognize speech sounds and hold a temporary “imprint” of them in short term memory.
2. You simultaneously determine the type of speech event (monologue, interpersonal dialogue, transactional dialogue) that is being processed and attend to its context (who the speakers is location purpose)
3. You use (bottom up) listening decoding skill and /or (top-down) background schemata to bring a plausible interpretation to the message and assign a literal and intended meaning to the utterance.
4. In most cases (expect for repetition task, which involve short-term memory only)

            Each of these stages represents a potential assessment objective:
 Comprehending of surface structure elements such as phonemes word intonation, or a grammatical category
Ø
 understanding of pragmatic context
Ø
 determining meaning of auditory input
Ø
 developing the gist, a global or comprehensive understanding
Ø
            From these stages we can derive four commonly identified types of listening performance, each of which comprises a category within which to consider assessment tasks and procedures.
1. intensive
2. Responsive
3. selective
4. extensive

INTENSIV LISTENING
            Once you have determined objectives, your next step is to design the task including making decisions about how you will elicit performance and how you will expect the test-taker to respond. We will look at tasks that range from intensive listening performance, such as minimal phonemic pair recognition to extensive comprehension of language in communicative context. The focus in this section is on the micro skill of intensive listening.

Recognizing Phonological and Morphological Elements
            A typical form of intensive listening at this level is the assessment of recognizing of phonological and morphological elements of language. A classic test task gives a spoken stimulus and asks test-takers to identify the stimulus from two or more choices.

PARAPHRASE RECOGNITION
            The next step up on the scale of listening comprehension micro skills is words, phrases and sentences which are frequently assessed by providing a stimulus sentences and asking the test-taker to choose the correct paraphrase from a number of choices.

RESPONSIVE LISTENING
            A question and answer format can provide some interactivity in these lower end listening tasks. The test-taker’s response is the appropriate answer to a question.

SELECTIVE LISTENING
            A third type of listening performance is selective listening in which the test-taker listens to a limited quantity of aural input and must discern within it some specific information. A number of techniques have been used that require selective listening.

Listening Cloze
            Listening cloze tasks (sometimes called cloze dictations or partial dictations) require the test-taker to listen to a story, monologue, on conversation and simultaneously read the written text in which selected words or phrases have been deleted. Cloze procedure is most commonly associated with reading only (see chapter 9). In its generic form, the test consists of a passage in which every nth word (typically every seventh word) is deleted and the text-taker is asked to supply an appropriate word. in a listening cloze task, test-taker see a transcript of the passage that they are to listening to and fill in the blanks with the words or phrases that they hear.

Information Transfer
            Selective listening can also be assessed through an information transfer technique in which aurally processed information must be transferred to a visual representation, such as labeling a diagram, identifying an element in a picture, completing a form, or showing routes on a map.

SENTENCE REPETITION
            Sentence repetition is far from a flawless listening assessment task. buck (2001 p. 79) noted that that such tasks “are not just tests of listening, but tests of general oral skills”. Further, this tasks may tests only recognition of sounds, and it can easily be contaminated by lack of short-term memory ability, thus invalidating it as an assessment toning comprehension error from an oral production error. therefore, sentence repetition tasks should be used with caution.


EXTENSIVE LISTENING
            Drawing a clear distinction between any two of the categories of listening referred to hear is problematic, but perhaps the fuzziest division is between selective and extensive listening. As we gradually move along the continuum from smaller to larger stretches of language, and from micro- to macro skill of listening. the probability of using more extensive listening task increases.

Assessing Reading Proficiency

            Reading ability is very difficult to assess accurately. In the communicative competence model, a student's reading level is the level at which that student is able to use reading to accomplish communication goals. This means that assessment of reading ability needs to be correlated with purposes for reading.

Reading Aloud

            A student's performance when reading aloud is not a reliable indicator of that student's reading ability. A student who is perfectly capable of understanding a given text when reading it silently may stumble when asked to combine comprehension with word recognition and speaking ability in the way that reading aloud requires.
            In addition, reading aloud is a task that students will rarely, if ever, need to do outside of the classroom. As a method of assessment, therefore, it is not authentic: It does not test a student's ability to use reading to accomplish a purpose or goal.
            However, reading aloud can help a teacher assess whether a student is "seeing" word endings and other grammatical features when reading. To use reading aloud for this purpose, adopt the "read and look up" approach: Ask the student to read a sentence silently one or more times, until comfortable with the content, then look up and tell you what it says. This procedure allows the student to process the text, and lets you see the results of that processing and know what elements, if any, the student is missing.

 

 

Comprehension Questions

            Instructors often use comprehension questions to test whether students have understood what they have read. In order to test comprehension appropriately, these questions need to be coordinated with the purpose for reading. If the purpose is to find specific information, comprehension questions should focus on that information. If the purpose is to understand an opinion and the arguments that support it, comprehension questions should ask about those points.
            In everyday reading situations, readers have a purpose for reading before they start. That is, they know what comprehension questions they are going to need to answer before they begin reading. To make reading assessment in the language classroom more like reading outside of the classroom, therefore, allow students to review the comprehension questions before they begin to read the test passage.
            Finally, when the purpose for reading is enjoyment, comprehension questions are beside the point. As a more authentic form of assessment, have students talk or write about why they found the text enjoyable and interesting (or not).

Authentic Assessment

            In order to provide authentic assessment of students' reading proficiency, a post-listening activity must reflect the real-life uses to which students might put information they have gained through reading.
  • It must have a purpose other than assessment
  • It must require students to demonstrate their level of reading comprehension by completing some task
            To develop authentic assessment activities, consider the type of response that reading a particular selection would elicit in a non-classroom situation. For example, after reading a weather report, one might decide what to wear the next day; after reading a set of instructions, one might   repeat them to someone else; after reading a short story, one might discuss the story line with friends.
            Use this response type as a base for selecting appropriate post-reading tasks. You can then develop a checklist or rubric that will allow you to evaluate each student's comprehension of specific parts of the text. See Assessing Learning for more on checklists and rubrics.


Materi keempat



Standardized Test
            A standardized test is any form of test that (1) requires all test takers to answer the same questions, or a selection of questions from common bank of questions, in the same way, and that (2) is scored in a “standard” or consistent manner, which makes it possible to compare the relative performance of individual students or groups of students. While different types of tests and assessments may be “standardized” in this way, the term is primarily associated with large-scale tests administered to large populations of students, such as a multiple-choice test given to all the eighth-grade public-school students in a particular state, for example.
            In addition to the familiar multiple-choice format, standardized tests can include true-false questions, short-answer questions, essay questions, or a mix of question types. While standardized tests were traditionally presented on paper and completed using pencils, and many still are, they are increasingly being administered on computers connected to online programs (for a related discussion, see computer-adaptive test). While standardized tests may come in a variety of forms, multiple-choice and true-false formats are widely used for large-scale testing situations because computers can score them quickly, consistently, and inexpensively. In contrast, open-ended essay questions need to be scored by humans using a common set of guidelines or rubrics to promote consistent evaluations from essay to essay—a less efficient and more time-intensive and costly option that is also considered to be more subjective. (Computerized systems designed to replace human scoring are currently being developed by a variety of companies; while these systems are still in their infancy, they are nevertheless becoming the object of growing national debate.)
            While standardized tests are a major source of debate in the United States, many test experts and educators consider them to be a fair and objective method of assessing the academic achievement of students, mainly because the standardized format, coupled with computerized scoring, reduces the potential for favoritism, bias, or subjective evaluations. On the other hand, subjective human judgment enters into the testing process at various stages—e.g., in the selection and presentation of questions, or in the subject matter and phrasing of both questions and answers. Subjectivity also enters into the process when test developers set passing scores—a decision that can affect how many students pass or fail, or how many achieve a level of performance considered to be “proficient.” For more detailed discussions of these issue, see measurement error, test accommodations, test bias and score inflation.
            Standardized tests may be used for a wide variety of educational purposes. For example, they may be used to determine a young child’s readiness for kindergarten, identify students who need special-education services or specialized academic support, place students in different academic programs or course levels, or award diplomas and other educational certificates. The following are a few representative examples of the most common forms of standardized test:
  • Achievement tests are designed to measure the knowledge and skills students learned in school or to determine the academic progress they have made over a period of time. The tests may also be used to evaluate the effectiveness of a schools and teachers, or identify the appropriate academic placement for a student—i.e., what courses or programs may be deemed most suitable, or what forms of academic support they may need. Achievement tests are “backward-looking” in that they measure how well students have learned what they were expected to learn.
  • Aptitude tests attempt to predict a student’s ability to succeed in an intellectual or physical endeavor by, for example, evaluating mathematical ability, language proficiency, abstract reasoning, motor coordination, or musical talent. Aptitude tests are “forward-looking” in that they typically attempt to forecast or predict how well students will do in a future educational or career setting. Aptitude tests are often a source of debate, since many question their predictive accuracy and value.
  • College-admissions tests are used in the process of deciding which students will be admitted to a collegiate program. While there is a great deal of debate about the accuracy and utility of college-admissions tests, and many institutions of higher education no longer require applicants to take them, the tests are used as indicators of intellectual and academic potential, and some may consider them predictive of how well an applicant will do in postsecondary program.
  • International-comparison tests are administered periodically to representative samples of students in a number of countries, including the United States, for the purposes of monitoring achievement trends in individual countries and comparing educational performance across countries. A few widely used examples of international-comparison tests include the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS), and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS).
  • Psychological tests, including IQ tests, are used to measure a person’s cognitive abilities and mental, emotional, developmental, and social characteristics. Trained professionals, such as school psychologists, typically administer the tests, which may require students to perform a series of tasks or solve a set of problems. Psychological tests are often used to identify students with learning disabilities or other special needs that would qualify them for specialized services.
Reform
            Following a wide variety of state and federal laws, policies, and regulations aimed at improving school and teacher performance, standardized achievement tests have become an increasingly prominent part of public schooling in the United States. When focused on reforming schools and improving student achievement, standardized tests are used in a few primary ways:
  • To hold schools and educators accountable for educational results and student performance. In this case, test scores are used as a measure of effectiveness, and low scores may trigger a variety of consequences for schools and teachers. For a more detailed discussion see high-stakes test.
  • To evaluate whether students have learned what they are expected to learn, such as whether they have met state learning standards. In this case, test scores are seen as a representative indicator of student achievement.
  • To identify gaps in student learning and academic progress. In this case, test scores may be used, along with other information about students, to diagnose learning needs so that educators can provide appropriate services, instruction, or academic support.
  • To identify achievement gaps among different student groups, including students of color, students who are not proficient in English, students from low-income households, and students with physical or learning disabilities. In this case, exposing and highlighting achievement gaps may be seen as an essential first step in the effort to educate all students well, which can lead to greater public awareness and changes in educational policies and programs.
  • To determine whether educational policies are working as intended. In this case, elected officials and education policy makers may rely on standardized-test results to determine whether their laws and policies are working or not, or to compare educational performance from school to school or state to state. They may also use the results to persuade the public and other elected officials that their policies are in the best interest of children and society.


Kamis, 03 November 2016

materi ketiga

DESIGNING CLASSROOM LANGUAGE TEST

Test Types

The first task you face in designing a test for your students is to determine the purpose for the test. Defining your purpose will help you choose the right kind of test and it will also help you to focus on the specific objectives of the test. Two types to create as a classroom teacher – language aptitude tests and language proficiency tests, and three types that you will almost certainly need to create – placement test, diagnostic tests, and achievement tests.

Language Aptitude Tests

A language aptitude test is designed to measure capacity or general ability to learn a foreign language and ultimate success in that undertaking. Language aptitude tests are ostensibly designed to apply to the classroom learning of any language.

Task in the modern language aptitude test
1. Number learning : Examinees must learn a set of numbers through aural input and then discriminate different combination of those numbers.
2. Phonetic script : Examinees must team a set of correspondences between speech sounds and phonetic symbols.
3. Spelling dues : Examinees must need words that are spelled some what phonetically
4. Word in sentence : Examinees are given a key word in a sentence and are then asked to select a word in second sentence that performs the same grammatical action as the key word.
5. Paired associates : Examinees must quickly team a set of vocabulary words from another language and memorize their English meaning.

Proficiency Tests

A proficiency test is not limited to any one course, curriculum, or single skill in the language, rather, is tests overall ability. Proficiency tests have traditionally consisted of standardized multiple. Choice items on grammar vocabulary, reading comprehension and aural comprehension. Some times also writing is added.
Proficiency test are almost always summative and norm – referenced. For example test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL) produced by the educational testing service.

Placement Tests

Certain proficiency tests can act in the role of placement tests, the purpose of which is to place a student into a particular level or section of language curriculum or school. Placement tests come in many varieties; Assessing comprehension and production, responding through written and oral performance, ended and limited responses, selection (multiple - choice) and gap-filling formats, depending on the nature of a program and its needs.

Diagnostic Tests

A diagnostic tests is designed to diagnose specified aspects of a language. A test in pronunciation, for example. Might diagnose the phonological features of English that are difficult for learners and should there fore become part of a curriculum.
There is also a fine line of difference between a diagnostic test and a general achievement test. Achievement test analyze the extent to which students have acquired language features that have already been taught, diagnostic tests should elicit information on what students need to work on in the future. In a curriculum that has a form – focused phase, for example, a diagnostic test might offer information about a learner’s acquisition of verb tense, modal auxiliaries, definite articles, relative clause and the like.

Achievement Tests

An achievement test is related directly to classroom lessons, units, or even a total curriculum achievement tests are (or should be) limited to particular material addressed in curriculum within a particular time frame and are offered a course has focused on the objectives in question.
Achievement tests are often summative because they are administered at the end of a unit or term of study. The specifications for an achievement test should be determined by :
• The objectives of the lesson, unit, or course being assessed
• The relative importance (or weight) assigned to each objective
• The tasks employed in classroom lessons during the unit of time.

Achievement tests range from five or ten – minute quizzes to three hour final examinations, with an almost in finite variety of item types and formats. Here is the outline for a midterm examination offered at the high intermediate level of an intensive English program in the US

Minggu, 30 Oktober 2016

materi kedua lte


The Principles of Language Assessment


Brown (2004) in his book, “Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices “mentioned five major principles of language assessment which consist of practicality, reliability, validity, authenticity, and washback.

Practicality refers to tests that should be true. A practical test considers not only the limitation of budget and time, but also has clear administration, scoring, and interpretation (Brown, 2004, p. 26-27). Reliability refers to tests that are consistent and dependable. Students or groups of target students are given the same test in two different periods of time, the test result would be similar. For test-takers, they are not ambiguous to a given field of study. Also, a reliable test not only gives learners clear directions but also offers administrated rubrics for grading or evaluation (Brown, 2004, p. 27). Compared to reliability, validity talks about a test which “is valid if it is measured what it is supposed to measure” and when it is used for the purpose of assessment (Nation & Newton, 2009, p. 167).

 Brown (2004) pointed out that a valid test should measure according to its purpose, but not “irrelevant or contaminating variables” (Brown, 2004, p. 30). Thus, a test’s meaningful information for criterion, and evidence of performance should be considered in order to measure a student’s learning ability. Furthermore, there are many ways to measure the validity of a test, including content validity, construct validity, criterion-related validity (concurrent & predictive) and face validity. Authenticity emphasizes that language is natural, contextualized and meaningful. Besides, authenticity offers language theme-based organization, story-line, or episode to reproduce real-world tasks. The last principle is washback which refers to “criterion for a test is the influence of the form and the content of the test” in the classrooms (Nation & Newton, 2009, p. 169). This is also what Hughes (2003) said,” the effect of testing on teaching and learning” (as cited in Brown, 2004, p. 37).

Can these principles apply to classrooms?

According to five principles: practicality, reliability, validity, authenticity, and washback, they can be provided as guidelines for evaluating a step-by-step procedure in the classrooms (Brown, 2004, p.40). Clearly, validity is the first priority choice to consider, and practicality is a minor important. Brown (2004) showed eight tips based on five principles’ features below,
(1) Are the test procedures practical? (2) Is the test itself reliable? (3) Can you ensure rater reliability?(4) Does the procedure demonstrate content validity? (5) Has the impact of the test been carefully accounted for? (6) Is the procedure “biased for best?” (7) Are the test tasks as authentic as possible? (8)Does the test offer beneficial washback to the learner? (pp. 41-48)

Teachers can take these mentioned tips along with checklists into consideration in order to evaluate test designs themselves for their own classrooms (Brown, 2004, p. 40). As a school teacher and a language school instructor, I realize that “quizzes, tests, final exams, and standardized proficiency tests” can be examined through five principles (Brown, 2004, p. 40). The lesson not only helps me understand how five principles are but also assists me to know they are connected to current classroom assessment design. Based on twelve-year compulsory educational system, teachers need to consider these principles as part of daily lesson design, also evaluate students based on a variety of assessment during class or after class.       

materi pertama

1. Testing
 
A test, in simple terms, is a method of measuring a person’s ability; knowledge, or performance in a given domain. Let’s look at the components of this definition. A test is first a method. It is an instrument- a set of techniques, procedures, or items that requires performance on the part of test-taker. Second, a test must measure. Some tests measure general ability, while others determine a general ability level; a quiz on recognizing correct use of definite articles measure specific knowledge.
Next, a test measures an individual’s ability; knowledge, or performance. Testers need to understand who the test-takers are. What their previous experience and background? Is the test appropriately matched to their abilities? How should test-takers interpret their scores? Finally, a test measures in given domain. In the case of proficiency test, even though the actual performance on the test involves only a sampling of skills, that domain is overall proficiency in a language-general competence in all skill of a language.
A well-constructed test is an instrument that provides an accurate measure of the test-takers’ ability within a particular domain.

2. Assessment and teaching

Assessment is popular and sometimes misunderstood term in current educational practice. You might be to think of testing and assessing as synonymous terms, but they are not. Tests are prepared administrative procedures that occur at identifiable times in a curriculum when learners muster all their faculties to offer peak performance, knowing that their responses are being measured and evaluated.
Assessment, on the other hand, is an ongoing process that encompasses a much wider domain. Whenever a student responds to a question, offers a comment, or tries out a new word or structure, the teacher subconsciously makes an assessment of the student’s performance.
At the same time, during these practice activities, teachers are indeed observing students’ performance and making various evaluations of each learner: How did the performance compare to previous performance? Which aspects of the performance were better than others? Is the learner performing up to an expected potential? How does the performance compare to that of others in the same learning community? In the ideal classroom, all these observations feed into the way the teacher provides instruction to each student.

3. Informal and formal assessment

One way to begin untangling the lexical conundrum created by distinguishing among tests, assessment, and teaching is to distinguish between informal and formal assessment. Informal assessment can take a number of forms, Starting with incidental, unplanned comments and responses, along with coaching and other impromptu feedback to the students. A good deal of teacher’s informal assessment is embedded in classroom tasks designed to elicit performance without recording results and making fixed judgment about a student’s competence.
On the other hand, formal assessments are exercises or procedures specifically designed to tap into a storehouse of skills and knowledge. They are systematic, planned sampling techniques constructed to give teacher and students an appraisal of students’ achievement.


4. Formative and summative assessment

Another useful distinction to bear in mind is the function of assessment: how is the procedure to be used? Two functions are commonly identified in the literature formative and summative assessment. Most our classroom assessment is formative assessment: evaluating students in the process of “forming” their competencies and skills with the goal of helping them to continue that growth process. The key to such formation is the delivery (by the teacher) and internalization (by the students) of appropriate feedback on performance, with an eye toward the future continuation (or formation) of learning.
Summative assessment aims to measure, or summarize, what a student has grasped, and typically occurs at the end of a course or unit of instruction. A summation of what a students’ has learned implies looking back and taking stock of how well the student has accomplished objectives, but does not necessarily point the way to future progress.

5. Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced tests
Another dichotomy that is important to clarify here and that aids in sorting out common terminology in assessment is the distinction between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced testing. In norm-referenced tests, each test-takers’ score is interpreted in relation to mean (average score), median (middle score), standard deviation (extent of variance score), and/or percentile rank. The purpose in such tests is to place test-takers along in the form of numerical score.
Criterion-referenced test, on the other hand, are designed to give test-takers feedback, usually in the form of grades, on specific course or lesson objectives. Classroom tests involving the students in only one class, and connected to a curriculum, are typical of criterion-referenced testing. In a criterion-referenced test, the distribution of students’ score across a continuum may be of little concern as long as the instrument assesses appropriate objectives.

6. Approaches to language testing: A Brief History

A brief history of language testing over the past half-century will serve as a backdrop to an understanding of classroom-based testing. Historically, language-testing trends and practices have followed the shifting sands of teaching methodology. For example, in the 1950s an era of behaviorism and special attention to contrastive analysis, testing focused on specific language elements such as the phonological, grammatical, and lexical contrast between two languages.


7. Discrete-point and Integrative Testing

Discrete-point tests are constructed on the assumption that language can be broken down into its component parts and that those parts can be tested successfully. These components are the skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing and various units of language (discrete language) of phonology, graphology, morphology, lexicon, syntax, and discourse. It was claimed that an overall language proficiency test, then should sample all four skills and as many linguistic discrete points as possible.
What does an integrative test look like? Two types of tests have historically been claimed to be examples or integrative tests: cloze tests and dictations. A cloze test is a reading passage (perhaps 150 to 300 words) in which roughly every sixth or seventh word has been deleted the test-taker is required to supply words that fit into those blanks. Dictation is familiar language-teaching technique that evolved into a testing technique. Essentially, learners listen to passage of 100 to 150 words read aloud by an administrator (or audiotape) and write what they hear, using correct spelling.
Supporters argue that dictation is an integrative test because it taps into grammatical and discourse competencies required careful listening, reproduction in writing of what is heard, efficient short-term memory; and to an extent.

8. Performance-Based Assessment

Performance-based assessment of language typically involves oral production, written production, open-ended responses, integrated performance, group performance and other interactive tasks. To be sure, such assessment is time-consuming and therefore expensive, but those extra efforts are paying off in the form of more direct testing because students are assessed as they perform actual or stimulated real-world tasks. In technical terms, higher content validity is achieved because learners are measures in the process of performing the targeted linguistic acts

9. Traditional and “Alternative” Assessment
Table 1.1 Traditional and alternative assessment
Traditional assessment Alternative assessment
One-shot, standardized exams Continuous long-term assessment
Timed, multiple-choice format Untimed, free-response format
Decontextualized test items Contextualized communicative task
Scores suffice for feedback Individualized feedback and washback
Norm-referenced scores Criterion-referenced scores
Focus on the “right” answer Open-ended, creative answers
Summative Formative
Oriented to product Oriental to process
Non-interactive performance Interactive performance
Fosters extrinsic motivation Fosters intrinsic motivation

Two caveats need to be stated here. First, the concepts in the table 1.1 represent some overgeneralizations and should therefore be considered with caution. It is difficult, in fact, to draw a clear line of distinction between what Armstrong (1994) and Bailey (1998) have called traditional and alternative assessment.
Second, it is obvious that the table shows a bias toward alternative assessment, and one should not be misled into thinking that everything on the left-hand side is tainted while the list right-hand side offers salvation to the field of language assessment! As Brown and Hudson (1998) aptly pointed out, the assessment traditions available to us should be valued and utilized for the functions that they provide. At the same time, we might all be stimulated to look at the right-hand list and ask ourselves if, among those concepts, there are alternatives to assessment that we can constructively use in our classroom.
It should be noted here that considerably more time and higher institutional budgets are required to administer and score assessments that presuppose more subjective evaluation, more individualization, and more interaction in the process of offering feedback.

10. Computer-Based Testing

Some computer-based tests are small-scale “home grown” tests available on websites. Others are standardized, large –scale tests in which thousands or even tens of thousands of test-takers are involved. Students receive prompts in the form of spoken or written stimuli from the computerized test and are required to type their responses.
A specific type of computer-based test, a computer-adaptive test, has been available for many years but has recently gained momentum. In a computer adaptive-adaptive test (CAT), each test-taker receives a set of questions that meet the test specifications and that are generally appropriate for his or her performance level.
Computer-based testing with or without CAT technology, offers these advantages:
• Classroom-based testing
• Self-directed testing on various aspects of a language (vocabulary, grammar, discourse, one or all of the four skills, etc.)
• Practice for upcoming high-stakes standardized tests
• Some individualization, in the case of CATs
• Large-scale standardized tests that can be administered easily to thousands of test-takers at many different stations, then scored electronically for rapid reporting of results.

Of course, some disadvantages are present in our current predilection for computerizing testing. Among them:
• Lack of security and the possibility of cheating are inherent in classroom based unsupervised computerized tests.
• Occasional “home-grown” quizzes that appear on unofficial websites may be mistaken for validated assessments.
• The multiple-choice format preferred for most computer-based tests contains the usual potential for flawed item design
• Open-ended responses are less likely to appear because of the need for human scores. With all the attendant, issue of cost, reliability, and turn-around time.
• The human interactive element (especially in oral production) is absent.