Significance of Crude Distinctions of Various Language Placement Tests - Essay Example

Many English language placement tests (such as IELTS, TOEFL, etc) discriminate by creating three crude distinctions (advanced level, intermediate, and beginner). Is there a theoretical framework that underpins such a three-dimensional distinction? Khurram S.Siddiqui University of Management Technology Abstract This Paper explores the significance of three crude distinctions (advanced level, intermediate, and beginner) of various language placement tests in order to gauge the language proficiency of non native speakers. In the course of writing the Bachman,L.F (1990), Fundamental considerations in language testing and Douglas,Dan and Smith (TOEFL Monograph Series) and many others have been focused/discussed to conclude the merits of these distinction and prove them constructive. Introduction To define language is a difficult task; same is the case with its assessment. It is perhaps the easiest and the cheapest thing that is in use. It prevails all around us and all the time we are using to fulfill our petty needs to the complex matters. But it does not mean that all the speakers or learners of a single language have the same level of knowledge; their levels and uniqueness are of course different owing to the individuality of every single human being. Usually a person’s overall development is taken synonymous to his/ her language cognition and its use as and when required. Importance of language assessment cannot be denied as it has increased manifold in current times owing to the fact that this world has become a global village with the advancement of science and technology; people of various ethnic backgrounds have to interact with one another when they move from one place to another, especially when people move for study purpose or for employment. Currently, English is the lingua franca at international level. In order to assess the language proficiency and understanding of the non-native speakers of English various tests are prevalent which assess student’s ability to use that particular language. Out of these tests, TOEFL and IELTS are most popular ones. (Alderson, J C and Clapham, C Research Report 2.) These tests are generally demanded by various UK, US, Canadian, Australian and many English speaking countries organizations as well as universities from its non-native employers and students before their proceeding(online History of IELTS). The major focal point why these tests are demanded is that their validity, reliability and attainability is of high value that crystal clear the language proficiency level of the test taker(Criper, C and Davies Research Report 1).. In order to successfully meet all the above challenges, the test usually covers basic four language skills i.e. listening, speaking, reading and writing. These four skills reflect the level of language attained by the test taker. The results/scores of these tests are broadly categorized by three basic distinctions i.e. beginners’ level, intermediate level and advanced level. There are some people who argue against these three fundamental distinctions. They claim that every test taker cannot fit in this general range. Despite all the controversies, it is a fact that cannot be denied that it is difficult for the employer or the university to draw a self picture of every individual after looking into his/her crude language score as it may vary say from 0 to 100 and moreover there will be no uniform trend in assessment as it will vary from organization to organization and university to university; so the latest pattern common in practice is that broad categorization of these scores is set by confining the score range in one of the three placement levels i.e. the beginners, intermediate and advanced levels. It was finally approved after taking into account a lot of past experiences and researches conducted by the language assessment specialists and researchers, especially during the recent past, from 2001 to 2005 (Clapham and Alderson, 1997) Theoretical Framework Language placement tests i.e. TOEFL or IELTS place non-native speakers in certain categories. These tests are developed by the testers on the postulation that language is a vehicle of communication that is the result of various underlining competencies which are inter-related as well as inter dependent upon each other to give effective results (Douglas, Smith1). The testers base these tests, especially TOEFL, believed that illocutionary(functional) competence and sociolinguistic competence should be dealt(Douglas, Smith1). This competence is so multidimensional that the examinees’ scores should ultimately depict level of attainment instead of raw scores.It was on the basis of this theoretical framework that Educational Testing System(ETS) revised its tests, more particularly Test of Spoken English, in order to make it users friendly(Douglas, Smith Foreword). Important Theoretical Terms Knowledge Bachman (1990) used knowledge and competence interchangeably. But, as far as knowledge is concerned, it is not something retained by the test takers or learners to a certain level, either it is something to be used or implied by them when and where it is needed. Competence Competence is one step ahead of knowledge as it encompasses multi linguistic aspects and is the ability of user to utilize this knowledge for carrying out various communicative purposes(Douglas and Smith3). Performance Performance is actually what is language performance in a test(Douglas and Smith3). The above mentioned terms are important as they are time and again used to approach the language testing and demarking the three crude distinctions, that is, Advanced level, Intermediate level and Beginner level. Experimental researches conducted by a number of language testers highlight that language proficiency or linguistic ability is multi dimensional (Canale and Swain,1980;Canale,1983; Savignon1983; Duran et al., 1985; Sang at al.,1986;Bachman, 1990 Chapter Four); but it is highly a complex phenomenon to point out what are those dimensions, where do they originate and what is the point where they interact with one another and even where do they overlap some times. Hymes(1971, 72) on the language competence says that it is some thing that is “systematically possible, psycho-linguistically feasible and socio-culturally appropriate”(Douglas, Smith 4).On the basis of logic presented by Hymes and many others, language testers also concluded that test takers may possess a certain level of knowledge that some times does not come to the lime light completely owing to the many factors which are beyond their control and they do not come up with the expected results. So, the test takers should be given some space by providing a prescribed score range that categorizes them in a better way according to the manipulation of their knowledge. The above mentioned theoretical framework shows that language assessment has a wider perspective and it is even different from the first language assessment. In present context of SLA, the testers are very careful about students’ rating as it is not as easy a task to assess as is Mathematics where logic mainly works. Moreover, language cannot be assessed in a compartment or in a closed environment; it is rather a multi-pronged way as every individual comes from different background. Testers have to cover a number of areas in language tests e.g. knowledge of phonology, vocabulary, word formation, sentence formation, sociolinguistic competence that include social meanings and grammatical forms in different sociolinguistic contexts also, strategic competence for grammatical difficulties, sociolinguistic difficulties, discourse difficulties and performance factors etc (Brown, J.D 23) It is important here that in language assessment tests for second language speakers and learners, tester try to check the students’ holistic performance in language instead of raw analytic scoring for each single aspect. Weir (1990) takes this holistic rating as a total impression of the performance that can best be depicted in the form of three crude distinctions of examinee’s level. These three distinctions of beginners, intermediate and advanced are the most appropriate dimensions to rate them. It is decided by the test makers which aspect should be tested in which way and how it will be scored e.g. if students’ listening and speaking skills instrument is designed in such a way that he will listen an audio in which some story or incident is narrated and he will reproduce it after listening, then the examiners have to look into many aspects like fluency, grammar, pronunciation, word bank,, pragmatics, cohesion, coherence, transitional verbs or turn taking strategies, self correction, facial expression, body language etc (Brown, J.D 59) . These are few possibilities which are taken into account by the examiners and show overall performance of the examinees in the sphere of listening and speaking in the tested language. Language is in fact a behavior to many language experts (Bachman 1990) which is certainly influenced by their first language (L1). In order to minimize the impact of first language, general assessment tools e.g. comprehension or vocabulary tasks are designed to check students’ second language strength. Its results speak of students’ understanding of language in the prescribed field. These results are more understandable when they are summarized to depict their language skills in three categories of beginners, intermediate and advanced level by examination body. These levels actually draw their comparison with the native language speakers. Beginner level depict that the test taker has probably never studied English but is able to utter few words/vocabulary like, hello, money, house etc. Intermediate level tells that student is capable of using language effectively to some extent but is not closer to perfection; daily routine does not bug him as he can understand the routine language as used in different scenario but still complex sentences or specific jargon related to different fields is difficult to understand. The advanced level is the highest place and it is possible even for non-natives to attain this level; it reflects student’s proficiency in using accurate and fluent language with good mastery over the use of idioms, phrases, phrasal verbs and collocation as well as colloquial expressions. These divisions are also important from students’ point of view. By getting their relevant category, students come to the conclusion that their result (what Chomsky says performance is of beginner’s level in comparison with the competence (Matthews 67) of the native language speakers/ learners. This way he can even plan for future course of action i.e. what he needs to develop is his basic sentence structure. He can grasp it with little effort of a week or two (embassy: online). Language performance of the test takers is bound to the context in which they learn or acquire a language according to Bachman (1990) and it should be working while language placement test are designed. Bachman named them as test method facets or characteristics. He forwarded a relationship between language ability and test methodology (Bachman1990,p224). Although the fundamental distinctions of the language assessment tests into three levels is justified under many theories or linguistic concepts yet Ingram & Wylie,(1993, pp. 221-222) argue for the implementation of these distinctions (as e.g. the use of band scale in IELTS). To them these boundaries or distinctions may be vague for the test takers as using such terms as almost always, usually, generally or hardly and rarely etc are not the clear terms which rate them in absolute terms(.Douglas and Smith19). but it may be possible by clearly defining this level rubric and share it with the test takers in advance. Conclusion In nut shell, it is to be concluded that creation of these three crude distinctions (advanced level, intermediate, and beginner) are extremely useful in language placement tests in a way that they take into account various linguistic aspects as well limitations. Works Cited Alderson, J C and Clapham, C (eds) Examining the ELTS Test: An Account of the First Stage of the ELTS Revision Project – Research Report 2. The British Council/University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate Bachman,L.F (1990), Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brown,J.D : The components of communicative competence, Testing in Language Programs, International ed.2005. Singapore: McGraw Hill.2005. Canale, M. (1983). From Communicative competence to language pedagogy. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp.2-28). London: Longman Canale,M.,& Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1: 1-47 Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, M.A: The MIT Press. Clapham, C and Alderson, J C (1997) Constructing and Trialling the IELTS Test – Report 3. Research Criper, C and Davies, A (1988) ELTS Validation Project Report: Research Report. The British Council/University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate  Douglas,Dan and Smith, Jan “TOEFL Monograph Series”11March 2010:http:// www.ets.org/toefl Duran, R.P., Canale, M., Penfield, J., Stansfield, C.W., & Liskin-Gasparro, J.E. (1985). TOEFF from acommunicative viewpoint on language profiency: A working paper. Princeton, NJ: EducationalTesting Service. History of IELTS 10 March2010 http://www.ielts.org/researchers/history_of_ielts.aspx Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R.Huxley & E. Ingram Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp.3-24). London: Academic Press. Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J.B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Ingram, D.E.,& Wylie, E. (1993).Assessing speaking proficiency in the International English Language Testing System. In D. Douglas & C. Chapelle (Eds.), A new decade of language testing research(pp.220-234). Alexandria , VA: TESOL Publications. Levels of English 9March2010http://www.embassyces.com/about/levels_of_english.aspx Matthews,P 67 Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics.2nd ed.Oxford:2007 Sang, F., Schmitz, B., Vollmer, H.J., & Roeder, P.M. (1986). Models of second language competence: A structural approach. Language Testing, 3, 54-79. Savignon,S. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory and class room practice. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Weir, C. J. (1990).Communicative language testing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Read More