论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】Based on the advanced theories of foreign experts and through the analysis of the differences between achievement tests and proficiency tests， the author concludes that we should not ignore the contents of the textbooks. Then some changes are suggested to be made to self-made tests.
【Key words】self-made test； achievement tests； proficiency tests
I. what is a self-made test and the way we often carry out
Self-made tests （ mid-term， final term， etc）are a kind of achievement tests， because according to Arthur Hughes， achievement tests are directly related to language courses， their purpose being to establish how successful individual students， groups of students or the courses themselves have been in achieving objectives. They are of two kinds： final achievement tests and progress achievement tests. Here the progress achievement tests are similar to the mid-term tests.
In our school， self-made tests take the form of National Matriculation English Test（NMET），which consists of listening， multiple choices ， close test， reading（including task reading） and writing.
II. Why should we improve the common practice of self-made tests
Many teachers argue whether the form of NMET is a suitable one for self-made test， one of their reasons is that NMET is not only an achievement test， but also a proficiency test.In the view of Arthur Hughes， proficiency tests are designed to measure people’s ability in a language regardless of any training they may have had in that language. The content of a proficiency test， therefore， is not based on the content or objectives of language courses which people taking the test may have followed， rather， it is based on a specification of what candidates have to be able to do in the language in order to be considered proficient. And he gives an example of a proficiency test used to determine whether a student’s English is good enough to follow a course of study at a British University.
Another reason of the con-teachers is that students will not pay any attention to the learning of the textbooks if we don’t test what are in the textbooks， which often has a harmful effect on teaching and learning. Sometimes we English teachers don’t trust English tests. Because they often fail to measure accurately whatever it is they are intended to measure.
“A good test or testing system is one that consistently provides accurate measures of precisely the abilities in which we are interested” and “a good test is an obedient servant since it follows and apes the teaching. ” said Davies， a testing expert. In terms of self-made test，（ mid-term， final term） ， they believe we’d better test what we teach. III. My views of improving self-made tests
Arthur Hughes suggests we base contents of achievement tests on course objectives rather than on course content（detailed course syllabus， or the books and other materials used）. He thinks if the syllabus is badly designed， or the books and other materials are badly chosen， then the results of a test can be very misleading.
If a test is based on objectives， there seems to be no reason to expect a difference between the form and content of achievement tests and proficiency tests. But so far as the content is concerned， the two tests differ from each other in that proficiency tests base on the theory of language proficiency or a specific domain of content， generally as provided in a course syllabus. While syllabus-based tests are generally referred to as achievement tests.
In my eyes， things are not so serious in China， the textbooks in our country have proved to be effective for the syllabus after so many years of practice. And the present syllabus is consistent with the course objectives. we’d better try to achieve a balance between the course objectives and the content of the textbooks.
First， as to the multiple choices in the exam papers， I suggest we should choose some exercises which consolidate the language points we learn in the period， for example： word uses such as verb collocations， verb phrases， sentence patterns， expressions in communication etc ，and some exercises concerning the grammar we learn and even some confusing grammar knowledge that has been learnt recently.
Second， in terms of writing， I advocate offering a topic similar to the topics of the units， so that our knowledge about the topics can be motivated since the texts are good models to imitate when we write， students will truly show how they have grasped the vocabulary and grammar and how well they can put what they learn into practice.
Third， I advise we add a new item—blank-filling about the texts and projects so as to arouse students’ interest and inspiration in reading， the focus of this item should be on the vocabulary in the reading materials of the units. The task of language teaching is to impart knowledge to students， attaching importance to the skills building. The textbook is the main material on which we base our teaching of the subject， of course our tests should refer to the textbooks.
Last but not the least ，as we know， we use the textbook to teach ，not teach the textbook， so we use items to test students’ language ability such as reading and listening. then one thing is very important to test writers， we must control the difficulty level of the close test， reading materials and listening materials so that we can guarantee the reliability and validity of the test. Furthermore， I don’t recommend sampling according to the themes of the units in the textbooks， sample widely and unpredictably， otherwise the backwash effect will tend to be felt only in that area， teaching and learning are likely to concentrate on what can be predicted.
IV. conclusion
To sum up， it’s proper for self-made tests to take the form of National Matriculation English Test .Considering the connections between achievement tests and proficiency tests and the relations between English teaching and testing in self-made tests， the author suggests that we achieve a balance between the course objectives and the contents of the textbooks. Only when we add something about the textbooks to self-made tests and improve the contents of the test， can we enhance the validity of self-made tests and better guide English teaching and testing for secondary schools.
References：
[1]Arthur Hughes Testing for Language Teachers，Cambridge University Press.
[2]刘润清，韩宝成.语言测试和它的方法（修订版）[M].外研社.
[3]L.F.Bachman Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing上外版.
[4]韩爱萍.东台市实验中学14-15学年度第二学期英语期中考试说明.
【Key words】self-made test； achievement tests； proficiency tests
I. what is a self-made test and the way we often carry out
Self-made tests （ mid-term， final term， etc）are a kind of achievement tests， because according to Arthur Hughes， achievement tests are directly related to language courses， their purpose being to establish how successful individual students， groups of students or the courses themselves have been in achieving objectives. They are of two kinds： final achievement tests and progress achievement tests. Here the progress achievement tests are similar to the mid-term tests.
In our school， self-made tests take the form of National Matriculation English Test（NMET），which consists of listening， multiple choices ， close test， reading（including task reading） and writing.
II. Why should we improve the common practice of self-made tests
Many teachers argue whether the form of NMET is a suitable one for self-made test， one of their reasons is that NMET is not only an achievement test， but also a proficiency test.In the view of Arthur Hughes， proficiency tests are designed to measure people’s ability in a language regardless of any training they may have had in that language. The content of a proficiency test， therefore， is not based on the content or objectives of language courses which people taking the test may have followed， rather， it is based on a specification of what candidates have to be able to do in the language in order to be considered proficient. And he gives an example of a proficiency test used to determine whether a student’s English is good enough to follow a course of study at a British University.
Another reason of the con-teachers is that students will not pay any attention to the learning of the textbooks if we don’t test what are in the textbooks， which often has a harmful effect on teaching and learning. Sometimes we English teachers don’t trust English tests. Because they often fail to measure accurately whatever it is they are intended to measure.
“A good test or testing system is one that consistently provides accurate measures of precisely the abilities in which we are interested” and “a good test is an obedient servant since it follows and apes the teaching. ” said Davies， a testing expert. In terms of self-made test，（ mid-term， final term） ， they believe we’d better test what we teach. III. My views of improving self-made tests
Arthur Hughes suggests we base contents of achievement tests on course objectives rather than on course content（detailed course syllabus， or the books and other materials used）. He thinks if the syllabus is badly designed， or the books and other materials are badly chosen， then the results of a test can be very misleading.
If a test is based on objectives， there seems to be no reason to expect a difference between the form and content of achievement tests and proficiency tests. But so far as the content is concerned， the two tests differ from each other in that proficiency tests base on the theory of language proficiency or a specific domain of content， generally as provided in a course syllabus. While syllabus-based tests are generally referred to as achievement tests.
In my eyes， things are not so serious in China， the textbooks in our country have proved to be effective for the syllabus after so many years of practice. And the present syllabus is consistent with the course objectives. we’d better try to achieve a balance between the course objectives and the content of the textbooks.
First， as to the multiple choices in the exam papers， I suggest we should choose some exercises which consolidate the language points we learn in the period， for example： word uses such as verb collocations， verb phrases， sentence patterns， expressions in communication etc ，and some exercises concerning the grammar we learn and even some confusing grammar knowledge that has been learnt recently.
Second， in terms of writing， I advocate offering a topic similar to the topics of the units， so that our knowledge about the topics can be motivated since the texts are good models to imitate when we write， students will truly show how they have grasped the vocabulary and grammar and how well they can put what they learn into practice.
Third， I advise we add a new item—blank-filling about the texts and projects so as to arouse students’ interest and inspiration in reading， the focus of this item should be on the vocabulary in the reading materials of the units. The task of language teaching is to impart knowledge to students， attaching importance to the skills building. The textbook is the main material on which we base our teaching of the subject， of course our tests should refer to the textbooks.
Last but not the least ，as we know， we use the textbook to teach ，not teach the textbook， so we use items to test students’ language ability such as reading and listening. then one thing is very important to test writers， we must control the difficulty level of the close test， reading materials and listening materials so that we can guarantee the reliability and validity of the test. Furthermore， I don’t recommend sampling according to the themes of the units in the textbooks， sample widely and unpredictably， otherwise the backwash effect will tend to be felt only in that area， teaching and learning are likely to concentrate on what can be predicted.
IV. conclusion
To sum up， it’s proper for self-made tests to take the form of National Matriculation English Test .Considering the connections between achievement tests and proficiency tests and the relations between English teaching and testing in self-made tests， the author suggests that we achieve a balance between the course objectives and the contents of the textbooks. Only when we add something about the textbooks to self-made tests and improve the contents of the test， can we enhance the validity of self-made tests and better guide English teaching and testing for secondary schools.
References：
[1]Arthur Hughes Testing for Language Teachers，Cambridge University Press.
[2]刘润清，韩宝成.语言测试和它的方法（修订版）[M].外研社.
[3]L.F.Bachman Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing上外版.
[4]韩爱萍.东台市实验中学14-15学年度第二学期英语期中考试说明.