Málfríður - 15.11.1993, Blaðsíða 14

ed. The differences in degree of
difficulty are not dramatic: for
pre university the test is not
trivial and for vocational stu-
dents the test is not too difficult.
Listening skills
In the Netherlands too, the
financial aspects of education,
and of testing, become more
and more important in the early
nineties. Hence test construc-
tion has to be more and more
efficient. This means that more
attention is paid to the develop-
ment of prototypes, to recycling
of existent tests and to a broad
spread of standardised tests.
Regular tests of Iistening com-
prehension produced at Cito for
the intermediate level of voca-
tional education seem to corre-
spond with the objectives for-
mulated for Basic education
which are for instance 'identify-
ing and understanding informa-
tion on radio, television or by
telephone' and ’understanding
the substance of spoken texts'.
So we try to do some recycling.
In the near future a research
project will be conducted to find
out if this existing test of listen-
ing comprehension is suitable
for the different groups of stu-
dents that will get basic educa-
tion. The groups range from
preparatory vocational educa-
tion to pre university education.
The results on the test after
three years of foreign language
learning will be examined as
well as the results of some
groups after two years. Though
originally meant to take three
years, Basic education may take
between two and four years. Pre
university students are expect-
ed to finish Basic education, to
attain the targets after two
years of foreign language train-
ing. So there is some kind of
tempo-differentiation introduc-
ed in the Basic education.
Writing skills
The objectives in this field
are rather minimal: stress is
given to the receptive skills and
the speaking proficiency. At the
end of Basic education students
have to be able to fill in simple
forms and to write short notes
and letters. The assessment is
concentrated on appropriate-
ness and communicative value,
rather than on grammatical cor-
rectness. This aspect becomes
important only if it breaks down
communication.
Conversation skills
The objectives for speaking
consist of 5 subdomains: under-
standing, socializing, communi-
cation strategies (discourse and
compensatory), functioning in
daily-life situations and talking
about certain topics. Test con-
struction in this field means
looking for the right format(s).
Perhaps it is efficient to test
communication strategies and
socializing in a separate test.
Perhaps it is better to integrate
those sub-domains in a struc-
tured interview and in role play-
ing. The main problem is, be-
sides reliable assessment to
develop elicitation techniques
for 'functional language use',
that is the right word at the
right time in the right place, the
non conventional language use.
Most speaking tests, although
they claim to test functions as
requesting, convincing and apol-
ogising can be summarized as
'imparting and seeking factual
information: A special research
project is dedicated to the
development of speaking tests
that make it possible to assess
functional language use.
Compensatory strategies,
socio-cultural competence
The testing of these two
domains is integrated in the
tests for communicative ability.
In the reading test figure ques-
tions like “What would the
world 'requin' mean?“ This ques-
tion is asked after students have
read an article on a boy who is
attacked by a shark and saved
by a dolphin (it is very improp-
able that they know the word).
In the speaking tests students
are supposed to ask for repeti-
tion if they do not understand
their partner. One of the criteria
for selecting appropriate texts
for reading comprehension is
their 'amount' of cultural infor-
mation. That is to say that they
describe aspects of daily life in
another culture.
Discussion
As mentioned above test
development for a brandnew
curriculum is a fascinating activ-
ity. Still there are three main
problems to examine in the next
years:
- Will it be possible to develop
a one and unique test for a
very broad and heteroge-
neous public that is valid,
reliable, which is not too dif-
ficult for the weak students,
nor too easy for the bright
ones?
- Will it turn out to be possible
to test functional language
use in a speaking test and
will this test meet criteria of
reliability and user friendli-
ness?
- How about decision taking
on the base of the tests? In
the case of a pass/fail deci-
sion, how to determine the
cut-off score? Or is it more
appropriate in view of the
aims of Basic education to
gather information in a port-
folio-form?
Ingrid Wijgh
test constructor FL Cito
Amhem, Holland
Heimildir
J.A. van Ek. J.L.M. Trim, The thresh-
old level 1990, a revised and extended
version of The threshold level by J.A.
van Ek, Council for cultural co-opera-
tion, Strasbourg, 1991.
J.A. van Ek, The threshold level, in a
European unit/credit system for mod-
ern language learning by adults,
Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 1975.
WRR Rapport Basisvorming, 1987.
Dutch Educational system, Den
Haag.
Advies voorlopige eindtermen, 1988.
Wetsvoorstel.
E. Shohamy, “A proposed frame-
work for testing the oral language of
second/foreign language learners",
SSLA, 10, pp. 165-179.
Ingríd Wijgh var leiöbeinandi
á námskeiði sem haldið var á
vegum K.í. og H.í. sl. sumar.
14