Developing an English Test for the Iranian Non- English major Students by Using Classical Test

Content validity is achieved when the content of the assessment matches the educational objectives. Criterion validity is demonstrated by the ability of the test to relate to external requirements. Construct validity takes into account the educational variables, such as the native language of the students, to predict the test outcomes. Reliable assessments have consistent results; Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure. A test is considered reliable if we get the same result repeatedly.

Reliability generalization examines reliability of scores from tests and detect the causes of measurement error (Kline, 2005).

standardized tests is that they lack a level of comprehension and are incapable of succeeding in the educational system. This belief is especially prevalent in regards to high stakes tests such as college entrance and high school graduation exams because the focus is on the test score. The perception is that these scores are the sole indicator of the student’s knowledge of a subject and their ability to succeed at a higher level of education. Therefore,

YOUR TASK 7: You will set some evaluation criteria to assess students’ learning outcomes. Guidelines for the assessment of English language learners will help you establish your criteria for assessment. The final document will be set on the e-learn of the university. Each student can look at it and start sharing

Not only is the test giving in both the students native language and english It is also takes into account cultural and linguistic issues that can come up in standardized testing.

Reliability measures come in the form of interrater reliability, test-retest for subtest high, internal consistency of .80 or higher, and decision consistency of classification (Brooks, Sherman, & Strauss, 2010; Davis & Matthews, 2010). Internal consistency used the split-half and Cronbach's Alpha. Concurrent validity for intellectual functioning used the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition (.34-.58), Differential Abilities Scales–Second Edition, and Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability (.53-.64); academic validity used Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Second Edition (WIAT-II) (Brooks, Sherman, & Strauss, 2010; Davis & Matthews,

It is made up of four major parts: standards for particular applications, technical standards for test construction and evaluation, professional standards for test use, and standards for administrative procedures. A test that is technically adequate meets the criteria for validity, reliability, and norms. Validity is “the appropriateness, meaningfulness, and usefulness of the specific inferences” that can be made from the test results. (American Psychological Association 9) Validity is the degree to which a test measures what it is intended to measure. Reliability is the extent to which the test results are dependable and consistent. Unrelated to the purpose of the test, errors in measurement can be viewed through inconsistencies in the performance, motivation, or interests of students being tested. Norms can be shown in age or grade equivalence, standard scores, and percentiles. They are generally shown in charts showing the performance groups of students who have taken the test. Norms show the comparison of the performance of new groups of test takers with the samples of students on whom the test was standardized. Goodwin and Driscoll (59-60) note that standardized tests have the following qualities: They provide a “systematic procedure for describing behaviors, whether in terms of numbers or categories.” They have an established format and set materials. Also, they present the same tasks and

Average alpha coefficient of the R-CRAS summary scales is .60. The mean reliability coefficient for individual variables is .58, with each variable achieving significance. Overall percentage of agreement for the decision variables is 91% with an average kappa coefficient of .81. Validation studies indicate a high level of accuracy for distinguishing sane and insane individuals (Rogers, 1997).

The data result in Table 3 shows that the mean of pre-test is 1.90 and the mean of post-test is 6.90. The difference of both tests is 5.0. The results show that the mean of post-test is higher than in pre-test. Based on both tests, the writer concludes that most of the students get higher score and phonemically aware. Some of the students are considered as displaying emerging phonemic awareness. So the students get better score in the post-test.

The reliability of an instrument contributes to the level of usability for empirical research (Whiston, 2009). Further, it refers to the replicability andstability of a measurement and whether it will result in the same assessment in the same individuals when repeated (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 2008). When determining the reliability of an assessment, a reliability coefficient of at least .80 indicates a trustworthy level of reliability (Trochim, 2006).

| Based on explicit knowledge and this can be easy and fast to capture and analyse.Results can be generalised to larger populationsCan be repeated – therefore good test re-test reliability and validityStatistical analyses and interpretation are

The manual discusses internal consistency and test-retest in terms of reliability. Internal consistency is measuring how scores on individual items relate to each other or to the test as a whole. In two subsample studies, high internal consistency was found. In the first study, with a mixed sample of 160 outpatients, Beck, Epstein et al. (1988) reported that the BAI had high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach coefficient alpha = .92), and Fydrich et al. found a slightly higher level of internal consistency (coefficient alpha = .94). This means that the items on the BAI are all measuring the same variable, anxiety.

Assessors would chose instruments that answer the referral questions. Therefore, the chosen instrument must be able to provide information that is well-found and to accurately identify a targeted trait and/or phenomena (Groth-Marnat, 2009). A number of criticisms on the Rorschach are related to its reliability and validity. Such criticism pointed to the importance of organized coding system. Due to Rorschach’s passing shortly after publishing the test, the instrument was utilized without a standard system. The comprehensive system (CS), which was introduced by J. E. Exner, Jr., has provided much needed standardization to the assessment method (Groth-Marnat, 2009; Weiner, 1999, 2001). More recently, another group of researchers developed a system known as the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) (Meyer & Eblin, 2012; see Meyer, Viglione, Mihura, Erard, & Erdberg, 2011). These systems have been proposed in the effort towards standardlization and increased validity (Choca, 2013). Of these two systems, CS is the most frequently used (Groth-Marnat,

There are not many advantages for English language learners whereas standardized testing is concerned. Teachers will have to create individualized ways in monitoring students’ progress to gain true assessment results.

It is important to mention that it was decided to apply a pilot test to 40 customers, with the purpose of measuring the questionnaire’s internal consistency. In the first version, the test was integrated by 22 items distributed in five dimensions and after being undergone to Cronbach’s alpha validity test, the instrument was redesigned to 20 items, as is shown in Graphic 4.