CRITICAL ANALYSIS (The impact of assessing on education)

The general learning objective:

• To understand and use some kinds of alternative ways of assessment
• To be able to mention some kinds of alternative ways of assessment
• To be able to describe each of them

Key words: Alternative Assessment, teacher-generated, different learning

styles Portfolios, Produced Demonstrations, Oral Presentations

Warming up Activity Provocative statements

Write a provocative statement on the board and then put students into small
groups to discuss their opinion of it. For example, some drugs should be legalised,
Facebook should be banned, Breaking Bad is overrated, one child is enough,
organic food is a waste of money, etc. Have students report back to the class. You
could make a list of arguments for and against the thesis.

Definition of Washback
Buck (1988: 17) describes washback as follows: There is a natural tendency
for both teachers and students to tailor their classroom activities to the demands of
the test, especially when the test is very important to the future of the students, and
pass rates are used as a measure of teacher success. This influence of the test on the
classroom (referred to as washback by language testers) is, of course, very
important; this washback effect can be either beneficial or harmful. In the case of
Japanese secondary school students, Buck (1988: 18) continues, the perceived
washback is negative: There are probably many reasons why most Japanese high
school graduates cannot use English for even the most basic purposes, despite
receiving hundreds of hours of classroom instruction, but surely one of the most
important is the washback effect of entrance examinations on the classroom. It has
been noted, however, that Buck’s assertions in this position article are not
supported by empirical evidence (Alderson and Wall, pers. comm.; Taylor, pers.
comm.). Indeed, we shall see that the existence of washback, particularly negative
washback, is a widely held belief, but that relatively little empirical research has
been conducted on this topic in language testing. Hughes (1989: 1) states simply
that ’the effect of testing on teaching and learning is known as backwash’ (this
term being synonymous with washback). He devotes a brief chapter to ’achieving
beneficial backwash’, in which he outlines seven ways of promoting positive
backwash (Hughes, 1989: 44-47):
1) Test the abilities whose development you want to encourage.
2) Sample widely and unpredictably.
3) Use direct testing.
4) Make testing criterion-referenced.
5) Base achievement tests on objectives.
6) Ensure [that the] test is known and understood by students and teachers.
7) Where necessary provide assistance to teachers.
TEST THE ABILITIES WHOSE DEVELOPMENT YOU WANT TO
ENCOURAGE. If you want to encourage oral ability, then test oral ability. This is
very obvious, a straightforward matter of content validity, yet it is surprising how
often it is not done. There is a tendency to test what it is easiest to test rather than
what it is most important to test. Reasons advanced for not testing particular
abilities may take many forms. It is often said, for instance, that sufficiently high
reliability cannot be obtained when a form of testing (such as an oral interview)
requires subjective scoring.
SAMPLE WIDELY AND UNPREDICTABLY. Normally a test can
measure only a sample of everything included in the specifications. It is important
that the sample taken should represent as far as possible the full scope of what is
specified. If not, if the sample is taken from a restricted area of that specifications,
then the backwash effect will tend to be felt only in that area. The new TOEFL
writing test will set only two kinds of tasks: compare/ contrast; describe/interpret
chart or graph. The likely outcome is that much preparation for the test will be
limited to those two types of task. The backwash effect may not be as beneficial as
it might have been had a wider range of tasks been used.
USE DIRECT TESTING. Direct testing implies the testing of performance
skills, with texts and tasks as authentic as possible. If we test directly the skills that
we are interested in fostering, then practice for the test represents practice in those
skills. If we want people to learn to write compositions, we should get them to
write compositions in the test. If a course objective is that students should be able
to read scientific articles, then we should get them to do that in the test.
Immediately we begin to test indirectly, we are removing an incentive for students
to practice in the way that we want them to.
BASE ACHIEVEMENT TEST ON OBJECTIVES. If achievement tests
are based on objectives, rather than on detailed teaching and textbook content, they
will provide a truer picture of what has actually been achieved. Teaching and
learning will tend to be evaluated against those objectives. As a result, there will be
constant pressure to achieve them.
ENSURE TEST IS KNOWN AND UNDERSTOOD BY
STUDENTS AND TEACHERS. However good the potential backwash effect of
a test may be, the effect will not be fully realized if students and those responsible
for teaching do not know and understand what the test demands of them, the
rationale for the test, its specifications and sample item should be made available
to everyone concerned with preparation for the test. This is particularly important
when a new test is being introduced, especially if it incorporates novel testing
methods.
COUNTING THE COST. One of the qualities of tests which trips quite
readily off the tongue of many testers, after validity and reliability, is that of
practicality. Other things being equal, it is good that a test should be easy and
cheap to construct, administer, score and interpret. We should not forget that
testing costs time and money that could be put to alternate uses.
Washback mechanisms
In the present section, the complicated mechanisms through which washback
takes place in the process of teaching and learning are explicated. as Hughes
(1993), there is a trichotomy to reveal how this phenomenon works in various
contexts as Bailey (1996). Bailey mentions that this special trichotomy permits
educators in general education and language testing experts in particular to
improve a main washback model which elaborates how the different elements that
make-up this framework interact to assist the comprehending of the nature of this
subject of interest. For describing this model, as Hughes (1993) mentions that the
trichotomy is shaped in three parts: a) first, the subjects who are basically the
individuals such as classroom-teachers, learners, administrators, material
developers, and even publishers whose perceptions and attitudes toward their
works may be a test. b) In this framework, the second component is called process.
Any action taken by the subjects are called the process, and they may contribute to
the learning process. c) Based on Hughes' model, the third section is product. It is
associated with what is acquired as the skills, facts, and other aspects and also the
learning quality. Unlike Hughes (1993) who emphasizes more on the three
elements that make-up this model, as Alderson and Wall (1993), concentrate on
what they referred to as "micro-aspects" of the teaching and learning process and
they might be influenced by examinations. They claimed that there is little
evidence supplied by empirical research to support the idea that examinations
influence on teaching. They advocated that "the concept is not well-defined, and
we believe that it is significant to be more precise about what washback might be
before we can seek out its nature and whether it is a natural or unavoidable
outcomes of testing" (p. 117). Ultimately, they recommend 15 hypotheses that can
assist investigators to indicate realms in teaching and learning that are often
influenced by washback and can stand as a foundation for further investigator and
investigation. These hypotheses have revealed that there exist a strong relationship
between the tests significance and the extent of washback. Alderson and Wall
resulted that further studies are required and they must involve enhancing
specification of washback hypothesis. They reported that investigators had to take
into account to research literature in the language testing field in at least two
realms: performance, motivation, and also the new innovation in the educational
settings.
The hypotheses were: A test will influence teaching;
• A test will influence learning;
• A test will influence what teachers teach; and
• A test will influence how teachers teach.
• A test will influence what learners learn; and
• A test will influence how learners learn;
• A test will influence the rate and sequence of teaching; and
• A test will influence the degree and the depth of learning;
• A test will influence the degree and the depth of teaching
• A test will influence the degree of learning.
• A test will influence attitudes towards the content and method of teaching
and learning.
• Tests that have important consequences will have washback; and
conversely
• Tests that do not have important consequences will have no washback.
• Tests will have washback on learners and teachers.
• Tests will have washback effects for some learners and some teachers, but
not for others.
Following the first studies realized on washback hypotheses, as Wall (1995)
followed up their study and emphasized the complexities in finding explanations
on how examinations used effect on the teaching process. Accordingly, Wall
suggested that the research areas that are observed to be related to washback
should involve (a) the noting of detailed framework studies to determine
fundamental features in the target system and the environment, involving an
analysis of the current testing practices as Bailey (1996).
In conclusion, the reviews of different studies on the washback mechanisms
have confirmed the significant correlation between the design of given
examinations and their positive or negative effect and power on teaching and
learning. Although, it is important to note that consequences of these studies, even
if they have contributed in advancing research into the washback realm in the
language testing field.

1. What does it mean to critically analyze something?

2. How does critical analysis differ from simply summarizing or
describing?
3. What skills are involved in critical analysis? (e.g., identifying
assumptions, evaluating evidence, recognizing bias, drawing
conclusions)
4. How does the type of assessment used influence what students learn?
5. Can assessment be used to promote deeper understanding and
higher-order thinking?
6. How can assessment be used to provide meaningful feedback and
support student learning?
7. What are the potential negative impacts of high-stakes testing on
students' motivation, creativity, and learning?

Activity 1.
Design a vision for an ideal assessment system for the future of education.
- Consider what types of skills and knowledge should be assessed, how
technology could be used to enhance assessment, and how students should
be involved in the assessment process.
- Explain your rationale for designing this assessment system and how it
aligns with your values and beliefs about education.

Activity 2. “3-2-1”

Have students write or talk about 3 things they learned, 2 things they still
want to learn, and 1 question they have. These values are interchangeable and can
be used in different combinations, or with different questions altogether.
Prepare reading tests for different levels on overall ability.