McNamara-Chapter 2 Communication & Test Design

This chapter looks at language test design methods from the past to present. One thing that should be noted is that many of the "old" methods are still in use to some degree.

The first important term the chapter discusses is "test construct" which is basically the aspects of knowledge or skills which are being measured (can be social not psychological). The author says the test construct is determined or influenced by the test creators view of language. So depending on the views of language you may get a pen/paper test vs. a performance assessment.

The chapter talks about discrete point tests, which kind of came about in the 60s (but still can be seen today). These tests were mostly multiple choice, basically tested a person's knowledge of grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation, tested different parts of communication separately (ie: reading, speaking, oral). Even though this type of test is supposed to be outdated, I know that school districts still use them, and most likely other organizations too.

Next the chapter discusses integrative tests which focus more on being able to communicate in a language rather than have knowledge about how the language works. These tests integrated the systematic features of a language.

The article also talks about Pragmatic tests: the ability to integrate grammatical, lexical, contextual, and pragmatic knowledge in test performance . and Communicative tests which have two main features: Performance tests that required assessment
to be carried during extended communication, and Attention to social roles candidates were likely to assume in real world settings.

Something I found important from the Ch.2 powerpoint was this shift of thinking when it comes to Language:

MAJOR SHIFT
Communicative tests represent a shift
from a psychological perspective on
language, which sees language as an
internal phenomenon, to a sociological
one, focusing on the external, social
functions of language.


I find it so interesting that in language testing (same with language teaching in many cases) that we have all this research that shows what methods are ineffective, and yet many schools still use these outdated practices. Do all tests fit into one of these categories in this chapter? I'm assuming that they do, or at least into a combination of categories. It's interesting how the views of what language is can change the method in which we design tests and assess students (or at least should change them!)