Methods of assessment
- 13. What is (a) objective and (b) subjective testing?
- 14. What are the main subjective testing techniques? Discuss their advantages and disadvantages.
- 15. What are the main objective testing techniques? Discuss their advantages and disadvantages.
13. What is (a) objective and (b) subjective testing?
What is (a) objective and (b) subjective testing?
From the point of view of marking, an objective test has a predetermined correct answer for each item. A subjective test , on the other hand, may allow a range of possible answers, some of which may be considered more acceptable than others.
Note: Strictly speaking, it is not the test itself that is objective or subjective, but the system used to mark it. Objective marking aims to minimise the need for the marker to make a judgement about the candidate's answer.
14. What are the main subjective testing techniques?
What are the main subjective testing techniques? Discuss their advantages and disadvantages.
Global quality assessment: the marker makes a quick overall assessment and places the scripts in rank order. This is relatively quick, but becomes difficult to manage with more than about 20 students.
Nine-pile system: scripts are initially placed in different groups according to their overall quality, with approximately the same number of scripts in each pile. The groups can then be refined and ranked more precisely.
Assessment by categories: the answer is assessed according to separate criteria such as vocabulary, grammar, content and form. For example, five marks may be awarded for each category, giving a total mark out of 20. This is probably the most common method of marking essays.
Disadvantage: markers need practice in applying the criteria consistently, and reliability between different markers may vary.
Section-by-section assessment: particularly useful for continuous written work. The marker divides the answer into sections, for example groups of eight words, and awards credit for features such as sequences of correct words, appropriate vocabulary, accurate verb forms and correct use of idioms. The system requires clearly defined credit points and can be particularly useful for marking practical forms of writing such as letters.
Division into sense groups: the answer is divided into meaningful units, and marks are awarded according to criteria such as communication and correctness. This method works best when the answer consists of a series of clearly identifiable points or responses to questions. It is less suitable for continuous narrative or descriptive writing.
15. What are the main objective testing techniques?
What are the main objective testing techniques? Discuss their advantages and disadvantages.
Objective marking can be used with a variety of formats, including:
- Multiple-choice and true/false formats , using material such as scripted speech, texts and arguments.
- Exact cloze and matching formats , including tasks involving information transfer and unscripted speech.
In these types of test, a predetermined key identifies the correct answer to each item. This makes marking relatively quick and consistent and reduces the influence of individual marker’s judgement.
However, the apparent objectivity of marking does not necessarily guarantee the validity of the test itself. With the exception of forms of validity such as face validity and predictive validity , the different types of validity are ultimately dependent on the assumptions and criteria used to define them.
If our assumptions about the nature of language and language learning are called into question, tests that are perfectly valid in terms of those assumptions must also be called into question.
For example, a test may satisfy the criteria of content validity , construct validity and concurrent validity , yet still fail to show in any meaningful way how well a candidate can perform in the target language.
This may happen if the construct underlying the theory of language learning or the content of the syllabus is not adequately related to the ultimate objective of the test, such as assessing communicative competence or actual performance in the target language.
Validity therefore exists only in relation to specified criteria. If those criteria turn out to be inappropriate, the validity claimed in terms of them may also be questionable.
Content validity depends on the accuracy and relevance of the test specification. When reviewing test results, a test may be considered satisfactory if its results are consistent with previous results, with the intended outcomes, or with what would reasonably be expected in the circumstances for which the test was designed.
Pragmatic validity: this can be investigated by correlating test scores with scores or ratings obtained from an appropriate criterion measure. However, the usefulness of this approach depends on the validity and relevance of the criterion itself.