Weaknesess of a Language 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.

Awarding bodies also provide very useful feedback on the assessment procedures used. In a recent EV visit it was noted that ESOL assessors needed to annotate learners’ work more carefully. This feedback was noted and better practice can be incorporated into future assessment work.

It is important to ensure that we meet the need of the students on every level. One effective way to do this is to observe, assess, and record children’s efforts and progress. In this way, an educator can prepare to help a child’s progression in the class. Being able to track and refer to the progress of a child helps to ensure greater levels of success. In the end, our program is only as successful as the children in our care. Record keeping can identify areas that need improvement, and allows us to teach to their strong points.

▪ phonemic awareness /oral language: The student is scoring very well in phonemic awareness/oral language. He was able to get 10 out of 10 in sounding out words. He was also able to identify and say almost the entire alphabet.

The test is designed by teachers and Pearsons, a test development company, and is designed to measure the proficiency of ELLs. The test assess four language modalities; listening, speaking, reading, and writing. It is done over five grade bands; K-1, 2-4, 5-6, 7-8, and 9-12 and is administered by trained staff members. The test is comprised of; multiple choice questions in listening, reading, and writing. A short written response and an extended written response for the writing area, and an oral response for the oral area, are also required. The oral, written portion of the test is graded by trained teachers, while the multiple choice portion is graded by Pearson.

• Not suitable for assessing large amounts of subject knowledge and understanding as it not supposed to be a memory test. It is best utilised to plug knowledge gaps that have occurred in other areas of assessment.

After they submitted the essay, teacher revises the essay, evaluate according to rubric, gives written feedback and students are asked to write second draft. Therefore, it makes the task a formative test. Because they are expected to write second and final drafts, this task can be considered as a process assessment. This task provides the opportunity to observe the development of students. In addition, the task has objective testing features. As the task has a rubric, which guides the students how they have to write and how their papers are scored. Moreover, our aim to give that homework is not compare the students to one another but to see whether they accomplish to write a successful essay regarding the rubric one by one. We try to have information about what the student can actually do in the language. Tests that are designed to provide this kind of information directly are said to be criterion-referenced (Hughes, 2003, p. 20). The course name is Advanced Reading and Writing Skills and the task is directly measure what the course aims. As Hughes (2003, p. 17) states that Testing is said to be direct when it requires the candidate to perform precisely the skill that we wish to

This article is about how using standards and assessments do not fully measure the educational quality of the students. It also suggests that the standardized assessments promise something that is not possible with all students. It is important to keep the standardized assessments simple and not go to deep into each subject.

Strengths - On the spelling portion of the test, Alex scored a total of 13 out of 22 questions correctly. This score reflects his spelling skills are at an equivalent age of 9-3, and a grade equivalent of 4.4. He demonstrated great knowledge and understanding of the words that were dictated. Alex remained confident and spelled correctly many words that are commonly misunderstood. During the writing portion, Alex obtained a total of 21 out of 24 correct responses in a seven-minute time span. In general, Alex displayed ease and confidence during most portions of the test. He worked quickly and showed few errors. The student was able to quickly read the words and place them together to make a correct sentence. The student writes at an age equivalence of 12 years old, and

Writing Prompt. This two-day lesson assessment determined whether or not students met the lesson’s objective. We chose this assessment because it provides qualitative data and incorporates the writing standard into our lesson. Also, the writing prompt is an open-ended assessment tool that does not limit the students’ choices when answering the prompt. If we gave them a multiple choice form of assessment, then the students only have 4 options to choose from that may not represent their thoughts entirely. Plus, students could select the correct answer through process of elimination, which would not represent the full picture of their knowledge and understandings. The writing prompt required the students to individually explain to an alien what its responsibilities are now that it is a member of the local community. Attached to the writing prompt was a writing rubric that would guide students to write a complete answer (See Appendix A). Since their language arts and reading teacher uses this writing rubric for her assignments, the student are familiar with it and understand how to write a complete answer. We had the students complete it individually so we could see each students’ voice and thoughts and eliminate the possibility of their answer being influenced by their peers’ opinions. Since we understand that the “the results of assessment are used to inform the planning and implementing of experiences and to evaluate and improve teachers’ and the program’s effectiveness”

Furthermore, the criteria for determining a program’s success or failure is objectivity identity with well-established assessments which accesses student’s literacy skills according to personal literacy skills and their progress in using them (Bell,

Curriculums are being narrowed to concentrate primarily on what is being tested (McMurrer, J., 2007). Narrowing the curriculum to spend more time on Mathematics and Language Arts (English) robs instruction time from other important subjects and deprives students from developing strengths and talents in the less-recognized, but not less-important subjects. This narrowing of the curriculum goes hand-in-hand with “teaching to the test”. According to the National Center for Fair and Open Testing (2008), “teaching to the test” has the dire result of ‘what is not being tested is not being taught’, despite the importance of the subject. The method of instruction starts to reflect the style of testing, which is different from real-world application. Since not all subjects can be tested by the multiple-choice option format for standardized tests, development in the areas such as Art and Writing are being

In the society of today, there are various educators who believe in assessment as proper method to measure the performance of a child in school as well as the overall achievement of a specific school system. The assessment may be presented in the form of verbal, written, or multiple choice, and it usually pertains to certain academic subjects in the school curriculum. Recently, many educators began to issue standardized tests to measure the intelligence of a common student body. (Rudner, 1989) These standardized tests were initially created to reveal the success in institutional school programs, and exhibit the abilities of students today. The standardized tests can reveal the strengths and weaknesses

Each subtest also has good criterion predictive validity, with high correlations (r s ≥ .59) between the subtests and other measures of similar constructs (Puranik & Lonigan, 2014). It was also stated that Inter- rater reliability ranged from 93% to 100%. The results of the test showed that the hypothesized three- factor model of emergent writing skills which consisted of conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and generative knowledge areas, best described children’ s performance on writing- related measures. The same three- factor model accounted for both older and younger children ’s emergent writing skills, despite significant differences in the absolute levels of skills in writing- related tasks between older and younger children. This article is different from the other but it still helps me to understand the purpose for administering the test. It explains how the test is valid and reliable therefore showing me this is the right one to

Everyone — even the most practiced and confident of writers — should spend some time preparing for the Analytical Writing measure before arriving at the test center. It is important to understand the skills measured and how the tasks are scored. It is also useful to review the scoring guides, sample topics, scored sample essay responses and reader commentary for each task.