Email this article DEVELOPMENT AND VALIDATION OF AN ENGLISH WRITING TEST AT A UNIVERSITY IN VIETNAM
About this article
Received: 24/02/20 Revised: 09/03/20 Published: 23/03/20Authors
Nguyen Xuan Nghia
, School of Foreign Languages, Hanoi University of Science and Technology
Abstract
This study was conducted in an attempt to replace the writing component of an Olympic English test battery at a Vietnamese university. After the test was developed with reference to Bachman and Palmer’s test construction model, it was administered to 18 participants at the university. The scripts were then independently marked by two raters, and the scores were used as evidence to determine construct validity and scoring validity of the test and test procedures. The Pearson correlation test was employed to check internal consistency of the test and scoring consistency between the raters. Correlation coefficients R = 0.72 and R = 0.94 suggested that the two test tasks well reflected the writing ability construct defined in the test, and R = 0.43 indicated both an intersection and a discrimination in the content and difficulty level of the test tasks. Inter-rater reliability was recorded at a satisfactory level (R = 0.74), but this value could have been enhanced with more strict marking guidelines applied to problematic scripts.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
[1]. L. F. Bachman and A. S. Palmer, Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
[2]. A. Hughes, Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
[3]. T. McNamara, Language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
[4]. J. C. Alderson, C. Clapham and D. Wall, Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
[5]. S. Stoynoff and C. A. Chapelle, ESOL Tests and Testing: A Resource for Teachers and Administrators. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications, 2005.
[6]. L. J. Cronbach and P. E. Meehl, “Construct validity in psychological tests,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 281-302, 1995.
[7]. S. C. Weigle, Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
[8]. A. Raimes, Techniques in teaching writing. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983.
[9]. J. B. Heaton, Writing English language tests. New York: Longman Inc., 1994.
[10]. A. Davies, A. Brown, C. Elder, K. Hill, T. Lumley, and T. McNamara, Dictionary of language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
[11]. P. Elbow, “Writing assessment in the 21st century: A Utopian view,” in Composition in the 21st Century: Crisis and Change, L. Z. Bloom, D. A. Dailer, and E. M. White, Eds. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1996, pp. 83-100.
[12]. B. Hout, “The literature of direct writing assessment,” Major concerns and prevailing trends. Review of Educational Research, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 237-263, 1990.
[13]. L. Hamp-Lyons, “Pre-text: Task-related influences on the writer,” in Assessing second language writing in academic contexts, L. Hamp-Lyons, Ed. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1991, pp. 69-87.
[14]. L. F. Bachman and A. S. Palmer, Language assessment in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
[15]. G. Henning, A guide to language testing. Cambridge: Newbury House, 1987.
[16]. W. J. Popham, Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1995.
[17]. L. F. Bachman, Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990.
[18]. T. Hedge, Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
[19]. B. Kroll and J. Reid, “Guidelines for designing writing prompts: Clarifications, caveats, and cautions,” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 231-255, 1994.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34238/tnu-jst.2020.03.2706
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.