|Exam Name||:||Test Of English as a Foreign Language(Educational Testing Service)|
|Questions and Answers||:||2200 Q & A|
|Updated On||:||June 28, 2017|
|PDF Download Mirror||:||TOEFL Brain Dump|
|Get Full Version||:||Pass4sure TOEFL Full Version|
point directly overhead in the sky; highest point; climax
adj. depending upon another; risky; uncertain; unstable; unsteady
two words having the same sound but different meanings
adj. indifferent; submissive; nonchalant; self-satisfied; at ease
favorable opinion arrived at beforehand; affinity; liking; fondness
to understand; to get to the bottom of; to measure the depth of
adj. flimsy and cheap; shabby; cheap
Nothing like a good debate! Besides, I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to see Richard Smith present, given how heavily I’ve drawn on his work in my learner autonomy projects…
The ELT Debate is an annual fixture in the IATEFL conference. It is a symbolic event in some ways, representing the relationship between ELTJ and IATEFL.
Language testing is a hot topic this year, with 46 other talks on testing and evaluation. Ways of testing have been described elsewhere in the conference as an uncertain and approximate business, there has been talk of fairness too.
The motion for today is that Language testing does more harm than good. We have Richard Smith to propose, from University of Warwick. To oppose, we have Anthony Green from the University of Bedford, a certified language testing enthusiast!
The rules of engagement:
For 15 minutes, Richard will propose. Then, over to Tony for 15 minutes of opposing the motion. After this, the floor is thrown open to comments for 20minutes. These will be addressed by the speakers all together at the end of the debate. At the end, there will be a vote!
Richard Smith proposes:
Richard isn’t a testing specialist but has an interest in the history and future of the profession and perhaps is the only person foolish enough to accept the challenge (his words!). He hopes to give voice to concerns of teachers, his students at Warwick, from many countries and start a debate which will continue beyond the conference. We need to be critical of the dominance of testing in our profession at this moment. The growing dominance of testing in ELT is reflected in the number of talks at the conference. Debating and being critical enables us to make changes. As we have done in materials, use thereof, content, with regards to native speaker models etc but we haven’t yet had this kind of debate about testing.
Looking at the pages of the newspaper in the conference pack, there is a large number of advertisements for tests and for preparation for these tests. It would be interesting to analyse the change in this over time.
Richard defines the proposal as referring to proficiency tests and their use, as well as institutional tests (achievement tests) that students must undergo and university entrance tests. Large-scale testing, institutional testing rather than assessment more broadly e.g. classroom assessment. So we are not talking about portfolio assessment, continuous assessment etc. (Which Richard thinks are good things, as are diagnostic tests etc.) It is achievement tests and proficiency tests that are in question.
Why has there been so little criticism until now? Because it is a big business and many of us are involved in some way. We feel in some way removed from the business. The specialism of testing is engaged with at specialist conferences. As teachers, we feel we lack the expertise to criticise, to change things.
Richard has done some research and is pleasantly surprised that there are critical debates going on amongst testers. However these haven’t filtered down to us as professionals here. He recommends The Power of Tests to follow up on the subject. He also went back to Language Testing for Teachers by Hughes, who says that too often language tests have a damaging influence on learning. I.e. backwash, or now, wash-back. Too often they fail to measure what they are intended to measure. It is an uncertain and approximate business. Tests don’t measure everything that is worth testing, only what is measurable.
What should we try to measure that we aren’t measuring?
We only measure utilitarian things.
Can we assess intercultural competence? learner autonomy? Things we think are valuable? These tests are not doing that. “Any assessment of language impoverishes one’s view of the nature of language as communication” – 2001. What about the role of native speaker norms in testing? Tests are still predicated on these. We also can’t capture the dynamism of language. We are expecting students that we test to conform to a norm to which they do not belong. Tests are not yet reflecting the realities of trans-languaging. They act as a barrier to change in our profession. They are a conservative force.
Areas of harm:
There is a hegemony in our field of proficiency as all-important. We see around the world the dominance of proficiency tests. But do we really want a system where only utilitarian goals are important?
What about the impact in a broader sense on the psychological well-being of learners? What is the psychological and social impact?
Anthony Green opposes:
Starts with a health-warning – those of a nervous disposition, with a weak heart, should leave the room now. AG is a language tester. Be afraid. Be very afraid. He is going to give us a test. If we fail, a preprogrammed testing noose will tighten around your neck…
MCQ can choose more than one answer
Why did you do this?
Is it harmful? No. Tests are jolly good things because we know that regularly testing students is a way to improve performance and memory. It encourages practice, enhances the practice done, it guides teaching and learning. We know what students have learnt, we know what we need to cover in more detail. Tests are an absolute necessity. Without tests, there can be no effective teaching. We only know if we have successful learners if we do some kind of testing of our students.
AG recognises that RS wants to talk about standardised tests (2% of testing that gets done) and that’s fine. So let’s imagine we have a world where there are none of these tests. What might it be like? We don’t have to think that hard, history can inform us. Testing has only been with us for a relatively short time. Not true to say there has been no debate over it. In 1889, Herbert Spencer brought together essays called The sacrifice of education to examination. So it has been talked about for a long time.
What are tests accused of?
All of this may be true. But the motion is that language TESTING that does more harm than good. But is it the tests or the ways in which people are using and abusing them? Is it the test or the teacher’s idea of what test preparation involves? Is it the fault of the test or the fault of the teachers or the teacher trainers or the education system or the publishers? Who drives this? The content of the test, or usemisuse?
Let’s go back to this idea of throwing away formal tests. No more IELTS, TOEFL, Pearson etc. We can go back to pre-1800s when it was so. What happened? Say you wanted to get a job where you had to use a language, what did you do? If you had a rich, influential relative, you would be handed it; if not, your option would be to buy one.
Think about your pilot who will fly you home? Would you prefer they had done a carefully constructed test that shows they could communicate with air traffic control? Or one who had paid someone for the job?
Tests are a better alternative than the bribery, corruption and old-boy networks that we used to have. We depend, sometimes for our lives, on effective language tests. That is not to say it’s perfect. There is a lot wrong with tests in widespread use today. So we need to all get involved and engaged with language tests. For this, we need to get involved with language testing – studying how tests are made, why they are made that way, whose interests they serve and what social purposes they carry out? We shouldn’t bury our heads in the ground and leave it to Cambridge etc. but study how these things are done, understand the thinking that goes into them, and engage with it. Take responsibility. Identify problems and deal with them, if there are problems.
AG would urge us to engage more with language testing, identify where its doing good and support that good, and identify where harms are happening as well as what is causing those harms. Even in our own classrooms, we can do better. The way we do better is by not pushing language assessmenttesting to the end of the CELTA or an afterthought in an MA. It should be central to our practice. We have to engage with the way tests are made in order to improve them and maximise the real good that they do for our students.
Comments from the floor
Now that the scene has been set, we have 20 minutes for audience comments.
Time for comments ran out
Our two speakers have 4 or 5 minutes to summarise their case
Testing has been exploited as a method of control and power, as a way to select, motivate and punish. Richard did a mock debate with this motion, with his students within the language testing option, a popular option, and most of them were in favour of the motion but by the end, they were in against it, as it is “a necessary evil”. Do we want evil in our profession? If there is harm being done, which we have established there is. Not just wash-back but psychological damage etc.
So what to do about this problem? “Tests and their demands are forced on test takers and teachers from above and they are forced into a position where they have no choice but to comply with demands.”
So let’s do something about it! RS wants to extend an olive branch to AG and thank him for engaging with teachers, with the profession. RS wants critical assessment literacy not just testing literacy. The testing industry should be giving back to the profession not just taking from it e.g. scholarships, financial support, planting forests for reducing carbon footprint etc.
99% of testing that happens is done by teachers in the classroom for the benefit of student learning. There is no way that we can teach our students unless we test them and train them to assess themselves too.
Back to large-scale testing. The tobacco industry caused a lot of damage. Did it reform itself? No. It reformed because consumers took control and pushed reform onto it. The motor industry. 30 years ago, cars were death traps with no safety features. As educators, you have a duty to students to take back control of language education from the language testing industry and give it back to learners where it belongs. Make language testing and assessment work for learners, not the language testing and assessment industry. But they are not going to reform themselves. If you want to improve the practice of language assessment, YOU need to take control. AG is delighted that there is this debate, THIS is being critical of language testing. Always ask the question, in whose interest is this being done, and how might it be done more in the interest of the learners. It will only be done better if you engage with testing. Let’s develop our assessment literacy and improve testing, not leave it to the evil Goliaths!
Now the final moments – it’s time to vote. We are going to vote by popular acclaim. Graham has a device to monitor how loud the “yay” cheer and the “nay” cheer is… He will compare the data and we may have a winner…
Ooops…the device broke down… make your own decision!🙂
All four skills – listening, speaking, reading, writing – are developed through a wide range of tasks which reflect closely the world of work.
This useful book provides well designed tests of bussiness English - vocabulary and reading .
Answer key to unit tests
Dear user! You need to be registered and logged in to fully enjoy Englishtips. We recommend registering or logging in. English, International, Business, Tests, answers, reading, ndash, tests
We are all well aware that a major problem in the IT industry is that there is a lack of quality Microsoft 70-536 Test Prep study materials. Our Certification Microsoft 70-536 Exam Preparation Materials provide you everything you will need to take a certification examination. Details are researched and produced by Certification Experts who are constantly using industry experience to produce precise, logical and verified explanations for the answers. You may get questions from different web sites or books, but logic is the key. Microsoft 70-536 Exam Preparation from Testking include: Comprehensive 70-536 brain dumps questions with complete details Detailed explanations of all the questions (when available) Questions accompanied by exhibits Verified Answers Researched by Industry Experts Drag and Drop questions as experienced in the 70-536 study guides and Actual Exams Questions updated on regular basis These questions and answers are backed by our GUARANTEE. Like actual certification exams our product is in multiple-choice questions (MCQs). Our Microsoft 70-536 Test King Exam will provide you with exam questions and verified answers that reflect the actual exam. These questions and answers provide you with the experience of taking the actual test. The practice exam is not just questions and answers. They are your access to high technical expertise and accelerated learning capacity. Our Microsoft 70-536 braindumps and questions have detailed explanations for every answer and thus ensures that you fully understand the questions and the concept behind the questions. Certification Experts, Certified Computer Trainers, Technical Coworker and Comprehensive Language Masters, who have a solid, verified and certified background and high technical expertise, have compiled these detailed explanations. Certification preparation Q and A provided by Microsoft 70-536 TestKing will make you feel like you are taking an actual exam at a Prometric or VUE center.
We are all well aware that a major problem in ... Microsoft 70-536 Exam Simulator with Explainations and Exhibits ...
microsoft, exam, industry, test, questions
Other software of Testkingm
New Training Tools software
Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests: Administration, Norms, and Commentary. 1998. (Ref. RC 386 .6 N48 S67 1998)This manual reviews primary neuropsychological tests, divided into 13 broad categories, which are currently in use at the University of Victoria Psychology Laboratory. The following information is provided for each entry: Purpose, source, description, administration, time to complete the test, scoring, comment, and references. Name, subject, and test indexes are included.Directory of Psychological Tests in the Sport and Exercise Sciences. 2nd edition. 1996. (Ref. GV 706 .4 D57 1996)This directory outlines 314 psychological scales, questionnaires, and inventories specific to sport and exercise settings. Each summary provides the complete source for obtaining the text of the test, its purpose, and a general description which discusses the test's construction, reliability, validity, norms, and availablility.Handbook of Psychiatric Measures.2000. (Ref. RC 473 P78 A46 2000)Published by the A, this work provides summaries of selected psychiatric measures to inform clinicians and policy-makers about the selection, use, and interpretation of assessment tools, including general measures, as well as those related to the DSM-IV diagnositc categories.Handbook of Tests and Measurement in Education and the Social Sciences.2nd edition. 2000. (Ref. LB 3051 L4543 2000)This anthology contains bibliographic references for and summaries of over 120 instruments, arranged under 36 topic headings, but does not include instruments that focus exclusively on personality or psychology. The book also includes the actual instrument or samples from it. and title indexes are included.Code of Fair Testing Practices in Education (A)
Tests in Microfiche. 1975- (2nd Floor MF Room)This microfiche collection contains unpublished tests in psychology and education. Consult the annotated index for access to the collection by subject, author, and title.Testm, .
* Note that published tests are generally available exclusively to licensed practitioners. They can be ordered from test publishers, such as those listed in Mental Measurements Yearbook and Tests. Samples of tests, however, are often included in the appendix of books and journal articles.
Barron's GRE: How to Prepare for the Graduate Record Examination, General Test. 2000. (Reserve Room LB 2367 .4 B76)Barron's How to Prepare for the Graduate Record Examination, Psychology. 2001. (Reserve Room BF 78 P34)Best Test Preparation for the GMAT: Graduate Management Admission Test. 1993. (FWB HF 1118 B433 1993)Best Test Preparation for the GRE, Graduate Record Examination, in Chemistry. 1993. (QD 42 B47 1993)GRE Biology. 2002. (Reserve QH 316 L49)Cracking the GMAT. 2005. (Reserve HF 1118 .C732 2005)Cracking the GRE Literature in English Subject Test. 1997. (Reserve PR 87 M17 1997)Everything You Need to Score High on the LSAT. 2000. (KF 285 Z9 M37)GMAT CAT SuperCourse. 1998. (Reserve HF 1118 M34 1998)GRE Online
Teacher Certification (Florida)
Art K-12: Study Guide for the Florida Teacher Certification Examination.(Reserve LB 1772 F52 M48 2003 and Curriculum AR.TPE FDE Gr.K-12 2003)Additional subjects and grade levels are also available in the Main Library and the Curriculum Librarypetencies and Skills Required for Teacher Certification in Florida.1990. (FL Docs. Edu.a 8:c 55990)Florida Department of Education: Educator Certification
Mental Measurements Yearbook. 1935- (Ref. LB 3051 M4655 & FWB & Online from 1988)
This work represents the most comprehensive source of critical reviews of standard, published tests in achievement, development, education, art, math, neuropsychology, personality, reading, vocations, and social studies. A critical evaluation and description of the test, in addition to information on the test's purpose, audience, publisher, reliability, and validity are provided for each entry. Indexes by test title, subject, score, name, and acronym allow access to the yearbooks. A publisher's directory and a list of reviewers are also contained in the appendix section. The Mental Measurements Yearbook is published irregularly and each new edition supplements rather than supersedes earlier volumes.
Test Critiques.1984- (Ref. LB 3051 T427 & FWB)
This work "provides in-depth descriptions and evaluations of widely used psychological, educational, and business tests." Guidelines regarding the application and technical aspects of each test are outlined. A bibliography accompanies each entry.
Open Educational Resources