Design communication language tests for grade 10th non-English majors at Bac Giang gifted high school = Thiết kế bài kiểm tra giao tiếp cho học sinh lớp 10 khôn20150227

1

Vietnam national university, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES



ĐẶNG THỊ HƯƠNG

Designing COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TESTS FOR
GRADE 10
TH
NON-English MAJORS AT BAC GIANG
GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL

THIẾT KẾ BÀI KIỂM TRA GIAO TIẾP CHO HỌC SINH LỚP 10 KHÔNG
CHUYÊN ANH Ở TRƯỜNG THPT CHUYÊN BẮC GIANG


M.A. MINOR THESIS



Major: Methodology
Code: 60.14.10




HANOI, 12/2010

2

Vietnam national university, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES



ĐẶNG THỊ HƯƠNG

Designing COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TESTS FOR
GRADE 10
TH
NON-English MAJORS AT BAC GIANG
GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL

THIẾT KẾ BÀI KIỂM TRA GIAO TIẾP CHO HỌC SINH LỚP 10 KHÔNG
CHUYÊN ANH Ở TRƯỜNG THPT CHUYÊN BẮC GIANG


M.A. MINOR THESIS



Major: Methodology
Code: 60.14.10
Supervisor: PHAN HOÀNG YẾN, M.A

HANOI, 12/2010
6

TABLE OF CONTENTS


Abstract
i
Acknowledgements
ii
Table of contents
iii
PART I- INTRODUCTION
1
1. Rationale
1
2. Aims of the study
2
3. Research questions
2
4. Significance of the study
2
5. Scope of the study
3
6. Method of the study
3
7. Design of the study
3
PART II-DEVELOPMENT

4
Chapter 1: Theoretical background
4
1.1. Language testing
4
1.1.1. Definitions of language testing
4
1.1.2. Fundamental criteria of a good test
4
1.1.2.1. Validity
5
1.1.2.2. Reliability
6
1.1.2.3. Practicality
6
1. 1.2.4. Discrimination
7
1.1.3. Approaches to language testing
7
1.1.3.1. The essay translation approach
7
1.1.3.2. The structuralist approach
7
1.1.3.3. The integrative approach
8
1.1.3.4. The communicative approach
8
1.2. Communicative language teaching and testing
8
7

1.2.1. Communicative language teaching and learning
8
1.2.2. Communicative language competence in testing
9
1.2.3. Communicative language tests
11
1.2.3.1. What is communicative language test?
11
1.2.3.2. Characteristics of communicative test
12
1.2.3.3. The needs for communicative tests
13
1. 2.3.4. Challenges in Communicative Testing
14
1.3. The design of communicative tests
15
1.3.1. Principles of designing communicative test
15
1. 3.2. Communicative Test Tasks
16
1.4. Conclusion
17
Chapter II. Results and discussion
18
2.1. Practical situation of teaching and testing English at Bac Giang gifted
high school
18
2.1.1. Students of 10th form and their English ability

18
2.1.2. The teacher of 10th form and their teaching situation
19
2.1.3. Teaching materials
19
2.1.4. The current testing situation
19
2.2. Results and discussion
21
2.2.1. The subjects
21
2.2.2. Instruments for collecting data
21
2.2.3. Data analysis
22
2.2.3.1. Analysis from English teachers‟ questionnaire
22
2.2.3.1.1. Teachers' attitude towards communicative language tests
22
2.2.3.1.2. Teachers' attitude towards testing techniques
24
2.2.3.1.3. Teachers' difficulties in designing communicative tests
26
2.2.3.2. Analysis from students‟ questionnaire
27
2.2.3.2.1. Students' attitude towards the current tests
27
8

2.2.3.2.2. Students' attitude towards communicative tests

28
2.2.3.2.2. Students' attitude towards difficulties in taking the
communicative tests
29
Chapter III: Designing Communicative Language Tests for Grade
10
th
non-English Majors at Bac Giang Gifted High School
31
3.1. Test objectives
31
3.2. Drawing up table of specification
31
3.3. The Sample of the communicative test
32
3.4. Description of the test design
32
3. 4.1. Listening comprehension
32
3.4.2. Grammar and vocabulary
33
3.4.3. Reading comprehension
33
3.4.4. Written expression
33
3.5. Test administration
34
3.6. Scoring procedure
34
3.7. Plans for validation

34
3.7.1. Internal validation
34
3.7.2 External validation
35
3.8. Suggestions on the communicative testing construction
35
3.9. Teacher and students' comment
35
3.9.1. Data analysis
35
3.9.2. Findings
37
PART III: CONCLUSION
38
1. Conclusion
38
2. Limitations and suggestion for further studies
38
REFERENCES
40
APPENDIX 1: Questionnaire for teachers
I
APPENDIX 2: Questionnaire for students
IV
9

APPENDIX 3: Questionnaire for teachers
VI
APPENDIX 4: Questionnaire for students

VIII
APPENDIX 5: A sample of communicative test
X
APPENDIX 6: Answer keys and marking scheme
XVII
APPENDIX 7: Transcript
XXII

10

PART I- INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale
English is a compulsory subject in Vietnamese high schools. Thanks to the
implementation of the new national English High School curriculum in the school year 2006-
2007, new textbooks of English have been introduced for grades 10 to 12, this series of new
textbooks focus more on such four communication skills as Reading, Speaking, Listening,
Writing and language focus. Since then the practice of developing students‟ communication
competence has been required in any lessons, which is an obligatory criterion to evaluate an
English lesson, so the purpose of communication is obviously shown off in the English
classrooms.
We know quite well that in teaching and learning a foreign language testing
plays an important role. "Both teaching and testing are so closely interrelated that it is virtually
impossible to work in either field without being constantly concerned with the other" (Heaton,
1990). To make it simple, testing is rarely separated from teaching. A test may either be
designed as a device to reinforce learning and to motivate students or as a means of assessing
students' performance in the language. Therefore, tests are constructed based on the teaching
contents. However, until now most of the exams, even high-school leaving examination, are
administered in the written form in which only Pronunciation, Reading and Grammar are
tested.
Among other subjects, English is a barrier to most of the students at Bac Giang

gifted high school although their English test scores are rather higher than their peers‟ ones in
other high schools of the province. Only about one-third of the students can communicate in
Basic English whereas the others may have troubles practicing such communicative skills as
Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing in the classrooms. They find it difficult to converse
with their teachers or their classmates to contribute to their lessons. There are many reasons
for this problem, one of which may be the requirements of tests which do not test Listening,
Speaking and Writing skills. This leads students to have negative attitude towards learning
these skills.
11

As a teacher of English who has taught English for many years, I find that it is
necessary to change students‟ attitude towards learning language skills such as listening and
speaking skills which are crucial skills in communication. Thus, changing the way of testing
language skills can help to change my students‟ negative attitude and improve their
communicative competence. Therefore, a well-design test is necessary for every language
level especially for high school level since it is the elementary level, which aims at improving
both students' language knowledge and skills.
Realizing the above mentioned problems, the researcher chose to work on the
theme: "Designing communicative language tests for Grade 10
th
non-English Majors at
BG gifted high school". The study is carried out with the full hope of helping the teachers
with designing a good test of English to assess students' language competence appropriately.
2. Aims of the study
The study aims at designing appropriate communicative tests for non- English majors
at Bac Giang gifted high school. To obtain the aim, we have to reach the following objectives:
- To develop the main theoretical basis related to communicative language test
design.
- To investigate the current testing situations at Bac Giang gifted high school.
- To propose communicative test construction for the 10

th
non- English majors at
Bac Giang gifted high school and a sample test will be designed based on the proposed test
construction.
- To offer some practical recommendation for improvement of testing at Bac Giang
gifted high school.
3. The research questions.
To achieve the above aims and objectives, the following questions are raised:
1. To what extent is communicative language testing used at BG gifted high
school?
2. What language skills and areas can be tested communicatively?
3. How can a test be designed to measure students‟ communicative abilities?
4. How do students feel about communicative language testing?
12

4. Significance of the Study
This study has been conducted with the hope that it could enhance teachers'
understanding of the importance of testing students' language ability communicatively.
Moreover, it would help teachers to grasp useful knowledge to design communicative tests.
Also, it is hoped that the findings will assist in raising educational administrators' awareness of
teachers' difficulties in conducting communicative tests.
5. Scope of the study
Because of knowledge, experience and time limitation, the researcher only
intends to overview a brief of current situation of testing English of 10
th
form students, to
identify teachers' difficulties in conducting communicative language tests. Then, basing on the
characteristics of the level and the situation background of the school, a sample of
communicative test was designed to assess students' communicative competence. In addition,
teachers' and students' comments on the tests and their suggestion for its improvement will be

presented in this thesis.
6. Methods of the study
In order to achieve the aims of the research, a study has been carried out with
data collected from a survey done on 5 high school teachers and 30 students to investigate the
present situation of teaching and learning, to collect their view of testing and to design the
communicative tests which can be implemented in Bac Giang gifted high school.
Besides, more information and data needed for the study has been gathered by other
methods such as discussions with teachers and students.
7. The design of the study
The study is organized into 3 parts:
Part I: Introduction: presents the rationale, aims and significance of the study, scope of
the study, research questions and methods of the study.
Part II: Development: consists of three chapters:
Chapter one presents the literature review on the basic concepts of testing,
communicative competence in language testing, communicative language tests, and the design
of communicative tests.
13

Chapter two discusses the teaching and testing of four language skills at Bac Giang
gifted high school
Chapter three presents the proposed construction for communicative test for the 10
th
non-English majors at Bac Giang gifted high school
Part III. Conclusion: summarizes the key issues in the study, points out the limitations
and offers some suggestions for further study.
The last one is the Appendix that includes the questionnaires, tables and a sample test
14

PART II-DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER I: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1.1. Language testing
1.1.1 Definitions of language testing
Up to now, there have been many books written about issues of language
testing, so a number of definitions of testing have been given out.
According to Brown (1994, p.252), a test is considered as "a method of
measuring a person's ability or knowledge in a given area." In his book (1994, p.373), he also
stresses that tests are seen by learners as dark clouds hanging over their heads, upsetting them
with thunderous anxiety as they anticipate the lightning bolts of questions they do not know
and worst of all a flood disappointed if they do not make the grade.
Read (1983, p.3) who shares the idea says that a language test is a sample of
linguistic performance or a demonstration of language proficiency. In other words, a test is not
simply a set of items that can be objectively marked; it can also involve a "subject"
educational of spoken and written performance with the assistance of a checklist, a rating
scale, or a set of performance criteria.
In Heaton's point of view (1990, p.5) a test should be considered, first, as
a device to reinforce learning and motivate the student" and then "a means of assessing the
students' performance in the language". In the former case, the test can determine the kind of
teaching before that, meanwhile, in the latter case the content of the test should depend on the
teaching that has taken place before. In his view, testing and teaching are closely "interrelate"
(p5).
From the above-mentioned definitions, we can understand a test is an effective
means of measuring and assessing students' language knowledge and skills. Moreover, it also
helps the teachers to find out whether or not the materials used, their teaching methods and
techniques are suitable to their learners' ability, needs, and expectations.
1.1.2. Fundamental criteria of language tests
15

In order to make a well-designed test, teachers have to take into consideration
the various factors such as the purpose of a test, the content of the syllabus, the students'
background and so on. In addition to these factors, test characteristics play very important role

in constructing a good test. According to many scholars in testing, all good tests have four
main characteristics such as reliability, validity, practicality and discrimination. In this small
section, only the main ideas are mentioned.
1.1.2.1. Validity
Validity is the quality that most affects the value of a test, prior to, though
dependent on, reliability. A test is considered as valid when it measures what it is supposed to
measure. This means that if a test is designed to measure examinees‟ language ability, it
should measure their language ability and nothing else. Otherwise, it will not be a valid test for
the purposes intended. It is not always easy to measure and quantify validity. There are several
types of validity which are discussed in most measurement texts such as face, content,
predictive, concurrent, construct validity. However, face validity and content validity are the
most important, which both involve the judgmental process.
Face validity is a simple form of validity in which researchers determine if the test
seems to measure what is intended to measure. Essentially, researchers are simply taking the
validity of the test at face value by looking at whether a test appears to measure the target
variable. If a test has face validity then it looks like a valid test to those who use it. Face
validity can be compared with content validity, which describes how far the test actually
measures what it aims to measure. For Example, many public English exams have high face
validity as they are seen as being very good tests by those who take them. In the classroom,
face validity is not an objective measure of how good a test may be. However, it is as
important as content validity, because learners and teachers need to think a test is credible if it
is to work.
Content validity refers to the correspondence between the content of the test and the
content of the materials to be tested. A test cannot include all the elements of the content to be
tested. Nevertheless, the content of the test should be a reasonable sample and representative
of the total content to be tested. In order to determine the content validity of a test, a careful
16

examination of the direct correspondence between the content of the test and the materials to
be tested is necessary. Although content validity, like face validity, is determined subjectively,

it is, however, crucial for the validity of the test. Therefore, subjectivity should not imply
insignificance. It is just the only that way the content validity of a test can be determined.


1.1.2.2. Reliability
Though validity is the quality that most affects the value of a test, it is
dependent on reliability (Davies, et al. 1999, p9). Reliability is a necessary characteristic of
any good test. For it to be valid at all, a test must be reliable as a measuring instrument.
Henning (1987, p.73) defines the reliability of a test as being related to the accuracy,
consistency, dependability, and fairness of measurement. This is judged from whether the
measurement gives similar results when it is taken on different occasions, or with different
instruments or by different persons.
A reliable test is assessed in terms of following factors:
 Test organization
 Time allocation
 Instructions
 Nature of language
 The extent to which the tests represent the syllabus
 The test item level of difficulty
1.1.2.3. Practicality
A test must be practicable, in other words, it must be fairly straight-forward to
administer. The most obvious practical considerations concerning the tests are the length of
time available for the administration of the test, the answer sheets, the stationary used, the tape
recorder and the presentation of the test paper itself.
1.1.2.4. Discrimination
Discrimination is another important feature of a test. According to Harrison
(1994, p.14) discrimination is "the extent to which a test separates the students from each
17

other". However, the extent of the need to discriminate will vary depending on the purpose of

the test. In many classroom tests, for instance, the teacher will be much more concerned with
finding out how well the students have mastered the syllabus and will hope for a cluster of
marks around the 80 per cent and 90 per cent brackets. Nonetheless, there may be occurrences
in which the teacher may require a test to discriminate to some degree in order to assess
relative abilities and locate areas of difficulty.
1.1.3. Approaches to language testing
Language tests can be classified according to four main approaches to language
testing: the essay translation approach, the structuralist approach, the integrative approach, and
the communicative approach.
1.1.3.1. The essay translation approach
This approach is referred to as the pre-scientific stage of language testing and
closely related to the Grammar-Translation method of teaching. Therefore, this approach
requires no special skills or expertise in testing but the subjective judgment of the teacher. The
main types of tests are often essay writing, translation and grammatical analysis. The tests also
have a heavy literary and cultural bias. However, only the test at upper intermediate and
advanced levels resulting from this approach sometimes have aural or oral component which
has been considered as an additional part not an integral one of the syllabus or examination.
1.1.3.2. The structuralist approach
This approach is characterized by the view that language learning is the
systematic acquisition of a set of habits. It draws on the work of structural linguistics, in
particular the importance of contrastive analysis and the need to identify and measure the
learner‟s mastery of the separate elements of the target language; phonology, vocabulary and
grammar. The skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing are tested separately from one
another as much as possible because it is considered essential to test one thing at a time.
However, the above-mentioned features of the approach are still valid for
certain types of tests and for certain purposes. According to Spolsky (1978), these kinds of
tests are considered to be objective, precise, reliable and scientific. Indeed, there are several
features of the approach which merit consideration when constructing any good test.
18

1.1.3.3. The integrative approach
This approach is aimed at testing the language in context. It is, therefore,
"concerned primary with meaning and the total communicative effect of discourse" (Heaton,
1989). Consequently, integrative tests do not seek to separate language skills into neat division
in order to improve test reliability. Such integrative tests are often designed to assess the
students' ability to use more than one skill at the same time. In other words, the main concern
of this approach is the students' global proficiency, not the mastery of a separate element or
skill. The typical types of tests following this approach are close tests, dictation, oral
interview, translation, and essay writing.
1.1.3.4. The communicative approach
The communicative approach to language testing is based on the assumption
that language is learned to express different kinds of functions, and emphasizes the need of
testing language by using processes of communication such as using language appropriately in
different types of situations to interact with people and perform on a wide range of tasks.
Communicative test concerns primarily with how language is actually used in
communication. It considers language to be interactive, purposive, authentic, contextualized,
and should be assessed in terms of behavioral outcomes (Morrow, 1979, as cited in Weir,
1990, p.79). Therefore, in order to deal with communicative language tests, the learners should
have good language performance linguistically and communicatively. That is, they must have
a good command of the components involved in communication. Madson (1983) comments
that the best exams in this communicative era are those that combine the various sub-skills
necessary for the exchange of oral and written ideas. He asserts that communicative tests need
to measure more than isolated language skills, to comprehensively indicate how well a person
can function in another language.
Obviously, communicative language testing is attracting more and more
advocates and it is also the main concern of this study. Further details of the communicative
language testing will be discussed in the following section.
1. 2. Communicative language teaching and testing
1.2.1. Communicative language teaching and learning
19

Communicative language teaching (CLT) has been discussed by different
authors such as Nunan (1989), Heaton (1989), Littlewood (1981), etc. They all agree that CLT
starts with a theory of language as communication. Definition of CLT, given by Nunan (1989,
p.194), has gained the most favor and popularity among those who are concerned with CLT
"CLT views language as a system for the expressions of meaning. Activities
involve oral communication, carrying out meaning tasks and using language, which is
meaningful to the learners. Objectives reflect the needs of the learner including
functional skills as well as linguistics objectives. The learner's role is as a negotiator
and integrator. The teachers' role is as a facilitator of the communication process"
This definition truly reflects several important characteristics of communicative
language teaching. First, in communicative language teaching, learners now have to
participate in classroom activities that were based on a cooperative rather than individualistic
approach to learning. Students have to become comfortable with listening to their peers in
group work or pair work tasks, rather than relying on the teacher for a model. They were
expected to take on a greater of responsibility for their own learning. And the teachers now
have to assume the role of facilitator and monitor. Rather than being a model for correcting
speed and writing and one with the primary responsibility of making students produce plenty
of error free sentences, the teachers have to develop a different view of learners' errors and of
his/her own role in facilitating language learning. Furthermore, the teachers have to be an
organizer of the resources of materials, a guide within the classroom procedures and activities,
a researcher and a learner, a contributor in terms of appropriate knowledge, abilities and
experience, a need, a counselor, and a group process manager.
Moreover, CLT also emphasize the use of authentic materials in teaching
language. It encourages giving learners the opportunity to respond to genuine communicative
needs in real-life situations. This is to help learners develop strategies for understanding
language as actually used by native speakers ( Canale and Swain, 1980, cited in Kim, 2003).
In short, CLT is considered a reasonable methodology to teach foreign languages as it
helps learners be more active and responsible for their own learning.
1.2.2. Communicative language competence in testing

20

It is known that the need of communicative competence in language testing
emerged from the requirements for better criteria in assessing communicative competence and
for catching up with new trends in language teaching. Canale and Swain (1980, p.48) broadly
viewed communicative competence as an integration of linguistic competence and
sociolinguistic competence including discourse and strategic competence as well. In other
words, both knowledge of the rules of grammar and knowledge of the rules of language use
are required in their communicative competence concept as it is stated:
"Communicative competence is composed minimally of grammatical
competence, sociolinguistics competence, and strategic competence. There is no strong
theoretical and empirical motivation for the view that grammatical competence is any more or
less crucial to successful communication that is sociolinguistic competence or strategic
competence. The primary goal of communicative approach must be to facilitate the integration
of these types of knowledge for the learners, an outcome that is not likely to result from
overemphasis on one form of competence over the other throughout a second language
program" (Canale & Swain, 1980, p.27).
As a result, in assessing communicative competence, it is not just assessing
knowledge of language rules but also knowledge of rules of language use including many
factors. In order to put Canale and Swain's concept of communicative competence into
practice, the design of communicative tests will employ their communicative competence
model as follows:
Canale and Swain's communicative competence model: in their model, there are four
main models like these (1983, p. 34)
* Grammar competence: Mastery of the language code: lexical items, rules of words
formation, sentence transformation, literal meaning, pronunciation, and spelling.
* Sociolinguistic competence: Mastery of appropriate use and understanding of
language in different sociolinguistic contexts, with emphasis on appropriateness of both
meaning (eg. topic function) and form (eg: register, formulaic expression).
* Discourse competence: Mastery of how to combine and interpret meaning and forms

to achieve unified text in different genres (eg. casual conversation, argumentative essay, or
21

recipe by using (a) cohesion devices to relate forms (eg. use of pronouns, synonym, transition
words, and parallel structures; (b) coherence rules to organize meaning (eg. concerning the
selection, sequencing consistency and balance of ideas.)
* Strategic competence: Mastery of verbal and non-verbal strategies both:
+ to compensate for breakdown in communication due to insufficient competence or to
performance limitations (e.g. of paraphrase).
+ To enhance rhetorical effect of utterance (e.g. use of slow, soft speech)
In addition, to support the model of communicative competence presented by
Canale and Swain that it is one of the most relevant models in assessing language learners'
communicative competence in this present time. It is interesting and beneficial to know that
there are many other similar reviews on communicative competence which significantly agree
with Canale and Swain's points of views.
Savingnon (1983, p.22) viewed communicative competence as:
"Communicative competence may be defined as the ability to function in a truly
communicative setting, that is, in a dynamic exchange in which linguistic competence must be
adapt itself to the total information input, both linguistic and paralinguistic, of one or more
interlocutor "
In summary, communicative competence shows a range of language aspects.
Not only are the students taught simply grammar but emphasis is put on acquiring four
language skills
1.2.3. Communicative language tests
1.2.3.1. What is communicative language test?
It is said that trends in language testing tend to follow teaching methodology.
Since the approach of emphasizing communicative competence in language teaching is widely
accepted, the testing tends to follow the trend.
Seyyed Abbas Mousavi (2009, p.106) defined that "A communicative test is a
test which requires candidates to perform communicatively like that of real-life situations. In

such tests, we evaluate samples of performance in a certain specific context of language use,
22

created under particular test constraints, for what they can tell us about a candidate's
communicative capacity or language ability".
A communicative test has to meet some other strict criteria. It has to test for
grammatical, discourse, sociolinguistic, and illocutionary competence as well strategic
competence. It requires the learner to use language naturally for real communication and to
put authentic language to use within a context. And it should test the learner in a variety of
language functions. A communicative test takes into account performance tasks related to the
testee's practical activities, that is, to the communicative context in which he would find
himself.
In the early 1970s thanks to Hymes' theory of communicative competence,
communicative language tests developed and came to have the two following features:
+ They are performance tests which require assessment to be carried out when
the candidate is engaged in communication, either receptive or productive, or both.
+ They see language as a sociological phenomenon, focusing on the external,
social functions of language while integrative and pragmatic tests see language as an internal
phenomenon. With this test, the use of authentic texts and real world tasks may be developed.
(Mc Namara, 2000, p.16). One of those distinguishing features that supersede other types of
tests is that besides systemic features of language, it requires students' careful study of the
communicative roles and tasks.
To conclude, a test which is communicative in nature must make it possible to
find out "not only what the learner knows about the second language and how to use it
(competence) but also to what extent the learner is able to actually demonstrate this knowledge
in a meaningful communication situation". Canale and Swain (1980, p.66)
1.2.3.2. Characteristics of communicative test
Communicative language tests also have some core characteristics that test
makers should follow to create a successful test. They are distinguished by four
characteristics:

First of all, the authenticity of tests can be considered something worth attempting to
pursue Weir (1990, p.12) points out that inauthentic tasks may interfere with the measurement
23

of the learners' ability which we seek. Tests of communicative language ability should be as
direct as possible (attempt to reflect the „real life‟ situation) and the tasks candidates have to
perform should involve realistic discourse processing. He advocates the use of genuine texts
can be taken with regard to task length and processing in real time. This agrees with Davies et
al. (1999, p13) who claims that an authentic language test should mirror "as exactly as
possible as the content and skills under the test". Therefore, communicative tests can offer
students the opportunity to encounter and use the language receptively and productively in
authentic situations to show how strong their language ability is.
Secondly, unpredictability is another feature of communicative language test
(Heaton, 1990; Weir, 1990). As a matter of fact, in real life communication, it is usually
impossible to predict what speakers will say, i.e., language input or to prepare for one‟s reply,
i.e., language output. Hence, if the purpose of the test is to evaluate the students'
communication skills, it is important to design and administer the test in such way that can
minimize students' ability to forecast the information he or she would receive.
Moreover, communicative test should be assessed qualitatively rather than
quantitatively (Morrow, 1982, cited in Kim, 2003; Heaton, 1990). Test should be designed to
reveal not simply the number of items which are answered correctly, but to reveal the quality
of the candidate's language performance. They all mean that language band systems should be
introduced to assess the learners' levels of performance as detailed description of each
performance level will increase the reliability of the scoring. More importantly, "each student's
performance is evaluated according to his or her degree of success in performing the language
tasks set rather than solely in relation to the performance of other students' (Heaton, 1990,
p.21), which reflects a more humanistic attitude to language testing.
The last characteristic of a communicative test is that it will elicit the students‟
use of combined language skills, as is the case in real life communication. In the tests of
productive skills, the emphasis is placed on appropriateness rather than on ability to form

grammatically correct sentences. Receptive skills tests focus on understanding the
communicative meanings of the speaker or writer rather than on picking out specific details.
As a matter of fact, the two are often combined in communicative tests, so that the candidates
24

must both comprehend and respond in real time. In real life, the different skills are not often
used entirely in isolation. Students in a class may listen to a lecture, but they later need to use
information from the lecture in a paper. In taking part in a group discussion, they need to use
both listening and speaking skills. Even reading a book for pleasure may be followed by
recommending it to a friend and telling the friend why you liked it.
In short, these features help us understand the reasons for the supreme role of
communicative language tests in the field of testing students' communicative competence.
1.2.3.3. The needs for communicative tests
The reasons why communicative tests are needed will be stated:
It started from the limitation of the traditional tests for example, translation and
discrete-point tests e.g. a multiple choice test for only one point of grammar or phonology etc
at a time. It is argued that those can access some parts of students' competence. According to
this point, there are many evidences to support as follows:
Firstly, testing language has traditionally taken the form of testing knowledge
about language, usually the testing of knowledge of vocabulary and grammar. Nevertheless,
there is much more to being able to use language than knowledge about it. Dell Hymes (1972)
proposed the concept of communicative competence. He argued that a speaker can be able to
produce grammatical sentences that are completely inappropriate. In communicative
competence, he included not only the ability to form correct sentences but to use them at
appropriate times. Since Hymes proposed the idea in the early 1970s, it has been expanded
considerably, and various types of competencies have been proposed. However, the basic idea
of communicative competence remains the ability to use language appropriately, both
receptively and productively, in real situations
And the other reason for the need of communicative tests is due to the new
trend of teaching. The new trend of teaching which is closely related to the trend of testing has

moved from traditional grammar translation and audio-lingual methods to communicative
teaching method which emphasizes the ability to use language in communication effectively.
So in order to follow the new trend of teaching as it is said that "trend in language teaching
25

tends to follow trends in linguistics and trends in testing tend to follow the trend in language
teaching".
1.2.3.4. Challenges in Communicative Testing
Communicative language tests are those which make an effort to test language
in a way that reflects the way that language is used in real communication. It is, of course, not
always possible to make language tests communicative, but it may often be possible to give
them communicative elements. As a result, test makers will have to cope with many
difficulties when designing communicative tests.
The first reason is the issue of predictive validity. When designing a test of
communicative ability, identifying test takers‟ needs based on communicative encounters that
they are likely to experience is one of the basic principles. However, it is not certain if test
makers can guarantee that testees performing well on a test in class are also able to do well
outside the classroom in a real life situation. One reason for this is that real life
communication is characterized by unpredictability. Studies have proved that test designers
have tried to make real-world tasks, but encountered difficulties from the varied or diverse
nature of contexts.
The second problem is assessment. Reliability was considered one of the most
important criteria of a good test. However, as was mentioned above, one of the characteristics
of communicative language tests is that they are normally assessed qualitatively rather than
quantitatively, which inevitably throws some doubt on their reliability because of the
involvement of subjective judgments. It is quite likely that different observers have different
interpretation for a candidate performance. As Weir points out (1990, p.13), “the holistic and
qualitative assessment of productive skills and the implications of this for test reliability need
to be taken on board.”
1.3. The design of communicative tests

1.3.1. Principles of designing communicative test
Communicative language tests are used with the goal of measuring language
learners‟ ability to take part in acts of communication or to use language in real life situations.
Communicative tests, which cover the four language skills of listening, speaking, reading, and
26

writing, are designed on the basis of communicative competence. According to Canale and
Swain (1980), communicative competence involves linguistic competence (knowledge of
linguistic forms), sociolinguistic competence (the ability to use language appropriately in
contexts), discourse competence (coherence and cohesion), and strategic competence
(knowledge of verbal and non-verbal communicative strategies) (p. 4). Understanding the
model of communicative competence is necessary and helpful for developing communicative
language tests, which involves formulating test objectives and considering the effects of the
test on teaching and learning. Following the model of communicative competence, several
authors constructed the principles of communicative language tests. Swain (1985, p.36-44)
precisely presents principles of communicative test design.
Principle 1: Start from somewhere: This means it is intended to suggest that
from both a theoretical and practical viewpoint, test development should be built from existing
knowledge and examples. When designing the test, test makers should state carefully what
they expect test takers to perform when they use the target language in a specific context,
which means that test writers must know what they want to test. After that, test makers can
establish scales and criteria in assessment procedures to measure exactly the stated features of
testees‟ performance.
Principle 2: Concentrate on content. It refers both to the content of materials
used as basis of communicative language activities and the tasks used to elicit communicative
language behaviors. The content of the materials used for generating communicative activities
must be sufficient to generate each component of communicative performance. Appropriate
content matches or fits learners‟ or test takers‟ age, proficiency level, interests, and
goals/needs. For instance, some tasks for students at grade 10th may include introducing
themselves and others, giving instructions, making a complaint and so forth. The tasks should

aim to be authentic and have clear reference in reality. These tasks match students' proficiency
level and age. Students are supposed to be able to do the tasks because what they do is what
society expects of them in real life.
Principle 3: Bias for the best. It means doing everything possible to elicit the
learners' best performance. It is important to minimize the effect of measurement techniques
27

on the test-taker's performance. Thus, to bias for the best is to provide the test taker with
useful suggestions as to what and how to respond, to provide adequate time to complete the
tasks and in case of written work, to have access dictionaries or other reference materials as
well as to have opportunity to review and revise their work. Swain (1984) declared that in
order to create an assessment procedure which is biased for best, test makers and teachers
should provide students or test takers appropriate review to help them to be well-prepared and
ready for the test, suggest strategies that will be beneficial, and construct the test in a way that
it is modestly challenging to the best students/testees and yet the weaker will not be
overwhelmed
Principle 4: Work for Washback. Washback refers to the effect a test has on
teaching practice through the means of involving teachers in the development and/or
administration and scoring the test, then it is hoped on not only to change aspects of what is
taught, but also to suggest alternative teaching-learning strategies. As Hughes (2003) indicated
that “backwash is now seen as a part of the impact a test may have on learners and teachers, on
educational systems in general, and on society at large” (p. 53). In order to obtain positive
washback, test writers should create clear scoring criteria that will be provided to both
teachers and test takers. Course objectives and test content are also put into consideration in
the hope of promoting positive washback.
1.3.2. Communicative Test Tasks
Communicative tests are often very context-specific. A test for testees who are
going to British universities as students would be very different from one for testees who are
going to their company's branch office in the United States. If at all possible, a communicative
language test should be based on a description of the language that the testees need to use.

Though communicative testing is not limited to English for Specific Purposes situations, the
test should reflect the communicative situation in which the testees are likely to find
themselves. In cases where the testees do not have a specific purpose, the language that they
are tested on can be directed toward general social situations where they might be in a position
to use English.
28

This basic assumption influences the tasks chosen to test language in
communicative situations. A communicative test of listening, then, would test not whether the
testee could understand what the utterance, "Would you mind putting the groceries away
before you leave" means, but place it in a context and see if the testee can respond
appropriately to it.
If students are going to be tested over communicative tasks in an achievement
test situation, it is necessary that they be prepared for that kind of test, that is, that the course
material covers the sorts of tasks they are being asked to perform. For example, you cannot
expect testees to correctly perform such functions as requests and apologies appropriately and
evaluate them on it if they have been studying from a structural syllabus. Similarly, if they
have not been studying writing business letters, you cannot expect them to write a business
letter for a test.
Tests intended to test communicative language are judged, then, on the extent
to which they simulate real life communicative situations rather than on how reliable the
results are. In fact, there is an almost inevitable loss of reliability as a result of the loss of
control in a communicative testing situation. If, for example, a test is intended to test the
ability to participate in a group discussion for students who are going to a British university, it
is impossible to control what the other participants in the discussion will say, so not every
testee will be observed in the same situation, which would be ideal for test reliability.
However, according to the basic assumptions of communicative language testing, this is
compensated for by the realism of the situation.
1.4. Conclusion
For the theoretical base of the study, this chapter has reviewed essential issues

in language testing such as definition of a language test, criteria of a good language tests, and
approaches to language testing. More specifically, this chapter looks at communicative
language tests with definition, characteristics of a communicative test and the needs for
communicative tests. It also reviews principles of designing communicative test and
communicative test tasks. This chapter has provided a justification for undertaking research
into the proposed research questions.