Test-Section Relative Strength Analysis: An Exploratory Study of Second-Year Students Core English Course Results
Main Article Content
Abstract
With relative variations, formal paper-and-pencil tests in Thailand, especially nation-wide entrance examinations–O-NET, CU–TEP, TU–GET, NIDA TEAP, NT– were generally concerned with 4 test types: vocabulary, grammar, indirect conversation, and reading. While a large proportion of both students and teachers has been grappling with test specifications–how to beat the test–, to the best of my knowledge, little attention has been paid to examine the extent of relations amongst the four pillars. (Whittome, 2019) This paper attempted to shed light on the relations among test sections in a formal examination whether there was an indicative section to the total score. This exploratory study was conducted with the test results of more than 700 second-year students in a course that every student needed to pass. The results were exported and processed with simple regression statistics tools of Microsoft Excel by testing the relative strength between two test sections with the total score. The preliminary analysis suggested that the section designed with TOEIC as a model was a bellwether, statistically significant at the 0.05 level, for the overall achievement compared with the other section. A brief expository account was provided as well as possible pedagogical implications for developing an achievement examination.
Article Details
References
Anthony, L. (2018). Introducing English for specific purposes. London: Routledge.
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge University Press.
Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd.
Brown, J. D. (2012). Understanding research in second language learning : A teacher's guide to statistics and research design. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Browne, C., Culligan, B., & Phillips, J. (2016). TOEIC service list. Retrieved from New General Service List: http://www.newgeneralservicelist.org/toeic-list
Coxhead, A. (2017). Vocabulary and English for specific purposes research. London: Routledge.
Craven, M. (2013). Pass the TOEIC test advanced course. Fulbourn: First Press ELT.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2019). Teaching and researching reading. New York: Routledge.
Hinkel, E. (2016). Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
jobsDB. (2019). JobsDB. Retrieved from https://th.jobsdb.com/th
Larson-Hall, J. (2012). How to run statistical analyses. In A. Mackey, & S. M. Gass, Research methods in second language acquisition : A practical guide (pp. 245-274). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lindhout, P., Teunissen, T., & Lindhout, M. (2012). Quick effective CEFR level evaluation of complete documents: Integrated readability appraisal of text and graphics with the L-scale algorithm. International Journal of Language Studies, 37-56.
Lloyd, P., & Fernyhough, C. (1999). Lev Vygotsky : Critical assessments. London: Routledge.
McCarthy, M., & O'Dell, F. (2005). English collocations in use:How words work together for fluent and natural English : Self - study and classroom use. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ritsumeikan University. (2020). How to apply. Retrieved from International Admission: http://en.ritsumei.ac.jp/file.jsp?id=426743
Rost, M. (2015). Teaching and researching listening. New York: Routledge.
Tannenbaum, R. J., & Wylie, E. C. (2019). Mapping the TOEIC® tests on the CEFR. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Tim, M. (2000). Language testing. New York: Oxford University Press.
University of Tsukuba. (2016). Undergraduate application information (Japanese programs). Retrieved from University of Tsukuba: http://www.tsukuba.ac.jp/en/study-tsukuba/under-graduate/undergrad_exam_schedule
Whittome, E. (2019). Cambridge international AS & A level literature in English coursebook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.