This article will ask why we test learners of English. 

Before I start, let's get some terminology straight. I'm not talking about exams. We as a society need exams. Governments and large institutions couldn't function without exams. Governments can't deal with tiny sub-sets of people: individuality prevents it from doing its business of dividing people up into large groups, separating out, say, the kind of person who will go on in life to run the laundrette on the corner, from those who will go on to run our banks into the ground. Governments have to plan via demographics. How many spaces will universities need in 20 years time? Will this area need a new or different type of school? Should we encourage people into the IT industry? This basic business of government - sorting people into socio-economic groups largely through the education system - has been going on for years. 

And there are some other exams, too, like driving tests, or IELTS, that need to exist to test a particular function. Such as whether Person A will be able to function on University course X in English (the English not being able to speak any other languages).

Okay, so we can see that there is an argument that exams need to exist. But tests? And by "test" I mean anything that looks or acts as a test, and that hasn't been designed by experts at a national level. Do they need to exist? Most teachers say yes. Let's look at some of the arguments why.

I need to see if my students have learned what I've taught them.

Well, this is the easiest one to answer. The answer is a simple "No, they haven't". Why? Well, because they have learned what they have learnt, and not what you have taught them. It has often been pointed out that the relationship between "teach" and "learn" is very different from that of "sell" and "buy". You can't say "I sold him the bike, but he didn't buy it". Yet all round the world staffrooms are filled with people saying "I taught the present perfect but they still haven't learnt it". Learners learn what they notice, not what the teacher notices for them. There may be happy occasions where the teacher helps the learner to notice. But these are few and far between. Because there isn't much time to allow for encouraging or assisting learners to pay attention to their individual intake because… we must cover the syllabus so they can pass the test.

I need to see if my learners have made progress

Another easy one. The answer is that your test won't tell you this. The chances that we could devise a test that could test exactly the same items or skills on Occasion A as again on Occasion B are tiny. And what would it tell us anyway? "This person has made progress". Oh. Good. Can it tell us why? Can it tell us how? Can it tell us whether, if we had taught differently,  they would make the same progress? Or less? Or more? Should they have made more progress than the progress they did make? Then you start asking "What is progress?", and we disappear down the rabbit hole of madness. 

And progress tests can easily be misused. Sometimes teachers want to prove to themselves that they have been Doing A Good Job. Sometimes Academic Directors use them to prove the opposite – as a form of teacher appraisal: "none of her students knew their reported speech!" 

Of course, progress is entirely a perceptual construct, so really it would be better to ask the learner "Do you feel you have made progress?" Our learners might then consider the question, and this might lead to a discussion about what helps them learn, how they notice progress, how the teaching process could help more. But of course that syllabus means we haven't got time. And the learners know the game. They will say "Yes, I have made a lot of progress. Could you write that on my report, please?" Because they realise that schools value tests more than learning.

I need to know what they don't know

Another familiar test is the placement and/or needs analysis test. These are often the saddest tests. A group of teachers with a dodgy take on grammar and testing will devise a test which will cover the traditional structures in a traditional order, with a few prepositions and phrasal verbs thrown in. This will represent The Ladder of English (or any other language), up which prospective learners will be sent, like newly press-ganged recruits on 18th century sailing ships, up, into the masts amid the howling winds of the Mixed Conditional and the Gales of Inversions. In colleges and offices some of these items will be replaced by Special Vocabulary and be born again as ESP. Does "the language of negotiation" come higher or lower than "describing graphs"? The tragedy is that, once this information is collected and the scores assigned, what does it mean? Who will interpret it and following what logic? Why test these things indirectly when you could simply ask a question? It's as if involving the learner is somehow a threat: we need to prove our professionalism by producing – yes! a special syllabus to follow. And then test.

A waste of time

Let's face it. Most testing that we do today is a waste of time. It has all the trappings of good responsible teaching, but essentially is just a time-consuming activity. Teachers administer tests that take up useful class time (unless, of course, they're being used as a form of collective class punishment). And then comes the marking… "Do we give half-marks or not?" "I think she's shown she understands the questions" "Does spelling count?" "Is that an "s" or a squiggle?" Hours of this stuff using all your breaks at school or late at night while the family watches TV in another room wondering where you are. To produce – what? 

Percentages

Registration software produced where I once worked allowed us to enter a single percentage mark to sum up a learner's year of learning. Yes, we had to summarise Peter. We had to balance out his reading difficulties and his handwriting issues with his wide vocabulary and his excellent interest in the classes, his variable control of past tenses, his playing a constructive and leading role in group work but with his high total of absences due to him taking his sister to school when his mother was working. When I asked where I could enter these comments, I was told the software didn't keep comments, just percentages. Okay then. Let's give him, erm, 58.5% then. And round it up. Of course, every teacher in the school used slightly different criteria and assigned their percentages in different ways. The school thought that made us look unprofessional. So they told us to write a test to make it fairer.

Testing. Yeah. Whatever…

By Andy Baxter

Comments

Submitted by Vijay Likhite on Thu, 02/14/2013 - 00:51

A wonderful analysis of these two terms. As some comments pointed out, the tests are not capable of judging the performance of the candidates. Not only that, the tests judge only the written capability. The oral tests are also devoid of any concrete measure of capability of the candidates. As STUDENTS TALK TIME is gaining more importance in the class rooms, in tests also STUDENTS TALK TIME should find a significant position. The tests should be devised based on this concept only. Yes. Tests are very essential to know the progress of the students and also the teaching & learning activity should not be considered as the activity of buying and selling. The new tests should be devised to give importance to STUDENTS TALK TIME.

Submitted by Butterfly Princess on Wed, 02/13/2013 - 23:46

Unfortunately our society still demands a more conventional form of evaluation and grading. But I agree with the ideas of this article. Great ideas to be thought about in the future.

Submitted by DanielRP on Wed, 02/13/2013 - 14:51

Hey, Andy! Thank you very much for your words! I have to say I feel quite isolated when it comes to how testing is viewed. It is frustrating to have to rush through things in the textbook because all of that content is going to be on the next test, which also means that I can barely talk to my students and actually listen to them in class. Not surprisingly, after an average of six years of 'learning', my students have very poor skills and reach the end of the course in the same shape as a castaway reaches the beach after crossing half the Atlantic ocean. (If they make it to the end, that is.) From Brazil, where I feel the same as you, Daniel

Submitted by Seymour Sunshine on Wed, 05/09/2012 - 11:58

You are here talking about summative assessment. Summative assessment is assessment OF learning. You need to get a grip on assessment FOR learning also known as formative assessment.

Submitted by eugeniapapaioannou on Tue, 12/27/2011 - 13:01

Dear Andy,

I came across your article and, while it was written with some sense of humour and interesting arguments, I'm afraid I will disagree that tests are useless tools and a waste of time.

First and foremost, what kind of tests are we talking about? It makes a great difference if one prepares a test to check what his teaching has brought about and a 'traditional' test that students despise and does not help to reflect their progress such as ready made tests from the publisher who has no idea about what you have done with a certain class and what elements you want to test at a given time.

Secondly, our teaching has to be frequently tested. Suppose you have taught your class how to change active voice into passive voice. Let me give you an example: the other day I had prepared this grammar for a class of young learners. I asked them to close their books because we would collect some information about our clothes and shoes. I started with a simple question: Where was your jacket made, Joseph? The student immediately looked at the tag on his jacket and said 'In Greece''. We continued with every item (clothes/shoes.pens...) Finally I had to write two sentences on the board:

Joseph's jacket was made in Greece.

A factory in Greece made Joseph's jacket.

And, of course, I had to explain how we change from active into passive voice, etc.

At that point I wrote 5 sentences on the board which the students had to change into passive voice. That part was TESTING. It gave me the feedback I needed: a) if they understood the technique, b) if they still had a problem with past participles of irregular verbs. The findings were very useful for the continuation of my lesson. You may say this was training. Well, yes, training and testing many times are the same, depending on the perspective you are looking at things.

Everything is testing depending on how you plan it, what criteria you set and how you treat the result. Teachers have to monitor their own competences so that they may correct their approach in class. At more free stages, when we think that our students are more autonomous and we have given all guidance necessary, then it is a time for testing and RESULTS. These results will tell us how many of our students can respond to grammar or vocabulary challenges and how successful we have been in the input of new material. Moreover, the structure of a test with its template, the instructions and its restrictions also tests a certain INTELLIGENCE which is how we respond to a written challenge and how we interpret instructions, etc.

In brief, testing is everyday; it comes in many forms and has two recipients: the 'student' and the 'teacher' in all trends of life. What, for instance, happens at home when we show to our children how to help with the garden? We plant a new plant while explaining all steps and then we give to the child another plant and say: ''Now let me see how you will do it yourself'. Well, this is testing...

Happy New Year

Eugenia Papaioannou - EFL Teacher

 

 

Submitted by korila on Mon, 06/20/2011 - 05:55

I think testing is very important because it helps both teacher and student understand the level of knowledge the student has.We need to  be fair with our students that's why we need to test them. thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submitted by Yeshimova Hilola on Sun, 05/29/2011 - 14:27

Dear Mr. Baxter,

I have read your article, and it is very considered of you that you share your thoughts about students doing tests. As you claim, tests do not show the real knowledge of students and it is confusing to find it out whether they make any progress or not. I entirely agree that tests are just the waste of time for both teachers and students because while testing they may cheat and have high scores, but in fact they have nothing in their head. Moreover, I agree that the relationship between “teach” and “learn” is absolutely different from that of “sell” and “buy”. A teacher may work hard explaining something to a student while he does nothing and learn nothing.

As far as I am concerned, this article is very essential for future teachers showing the negative sides of testing. Tests are not just simply wasting of valuable time, but also they limit the students’ capability of discussing, communicating and thinking logically.

Generally, I have no objections to the article, because you reveal the reality. Thus I hold a view that testing system should be improved or removed at all giving a way to examinations in oral form because only this way students will not cease thinking and improving themselves.             

 

Submitted by Yeshimova Hilola on Sun, 05/22/2011 - 12:35

I have read the article “Testing – why bother?” by Andy Baxter.The author shares her thoughts about students doing tests. As she claims, tests do not show the real knowledge of students and it is confusing to find it out whether they make any progress or not. I entirely agree that tests are just the waste of time for both teachers and students because while testing they may cheat and have high scores, but in fact they have nothing in their head. Moreover, I agree that the relationship between “teach” and “learn” is absolutely different from that of “sell” and “buy”. A teacher may work hard explaining something to a student while he does nothing and learn nothing. As far as I am concerned, this article is very essential for future teachers showing the negative sides of testing. Tests are not just simply wasting of valuable time, but also they limit the students’ capability of discussing, communicating and thinking logically. Generally, I have no objections to the author. Thus I hold a view that testing system should be improved or removed at all giving a way to examinations in oral form because only this way students will not cease thinking and improving themselves.

Submitted by edushi on Wed, 04/27/2011 - 10:15

I agree with the fact that tests sometimes can be inefficient. But in our education system as in many ones around the world tests are inevitable. In my opinion if tests are covering properly the school curriculum they would be for the learners' benefit. Thank you for your ideas.

Submitted by G Morgan on Fri, 04/08/2011 - 21:14

I'm a student (of Dutch). I rock every test in the classroom! However, I cannot understand anything my Dutch-speaking neighbours say. But thanks to the tests it looks as though taxpayer's money is well spent subsidising my studies. Hmm.

Submitted by willygest11 on Tue, 04/05/2011 - 17:13

how often is it necessary to test students??

Submitted by eduworlds on Tue, 03/29/2011 - 09:11

This is an interesting discussion. I think we need to take several perspectives into account. There are the pedagogic arguments of course but also learner expectiations. And if a test is expected, maybe we should give them one.

Submitted by bonbone on Fri, 03/25/2011 - 14:10

In our school system tests dominate a lot, but it isn't a problem. I think the only probem is that the tests are only in the written form and they take the final mark. It's not fair for the pupils. Pupils don't have to just write it but also and it's more important to speak and understand English. More space in speaking activity.

Submitted by agayeva shefeq7394 on Mon, 05/23/2011 - 22:16

In reply to by bonbone

Hi, bonbone in our country also almost in most state schools students' knowledge are examined  by tests at the end of the terms.My students always complains that its unfair method, when they each time come across mostly with grammar tests. Majority of the students now do their best to practice mostly their oral speech because they see its importance and think that speaking is more necessary than doing grammar tests.

Submitted by sirajkhan on Sun, 05/29/2011 - 17:47

In reply to by bonbone

Yes, I am with you: speaking activity is one of the best ways to involve and understand the need of the student through constructive and positve frame of mind.

Submitted by sirajkhan on Wed, 02/08/2012 - 06:15

In reply to by bonbone

Yes I am with you, speaking is also key vibrant to discuss and share your ideas and information and open your thoughts and ideas whatever you have in  your mind just do it .......

Submitted by besa furxhi on Tue, 03/22/2011 - 19:49

I do take in consideration your point of view. I think that tests have their good as long as their bad points,but we should "test "in order to "find " and tests are relative just like everything on Earth, aren`t they?

Submitted by Débora Alejandra on Thu, 03/17/2011 - 11:46

Dear Andy,

Thank you for sharing your reflections with us. I agree with every single idea you describe so clearly. The other day one of my students took TOEFL ibt, she was terribly nervous, she had applied for Harvard, thus she needed a high score in her exam. The situation in the exam room was far different from the quiet and realxed  atmosphere we have in our classroom. There, the students were all recording their speaking activities, mumbling their words, all doing different speaking tasks, while others working on their reading or writing. She got so frustrated. And I really wonder if the result she got  really shows her ability to use English, her ability to think critically. With all respect to tests administrators, my answer is "no". Fortunately, she can take toefl again soon.

How much do test administrators really help provide the correct atmosphere to help students produce good answers? I persuade my students that taking the exam is a possibility to share the work they have done in and out of the classroom. 

Because, after all, is it possible to get a degree without tests and exams? Is it possible to apply for a master or PhD in an English speaking country without taking an internationa exam? The answer is abvious. Maybe we, as teachers and facilitators have to work on developing the appropriate skills to taking exams.

I feel you might consider my comment very critical when it comes to exams, but my students and I work hard for that day, and sometimes it turns out to be so frustrating. Sometimes ... 

Thank you for this opportunity to share experiences.

Debbie

 

      

Submitted by Marta Markowska on Wed, 03/16/2011 - 19:34

Thank you for writing. One more remark: not only do the tests take valuable lesson time, but also they limit the students' capability of communicating and thinking logically. All they need is to learn to do tests, and that's it. 

Submitted by ondacuantica on Tue, 03/15/2011 - 23:20

Love it, thanks for taking the time to write this!

Submitted by rey_red on Thu, 03/17/2011 - 02:06

In reply to by ondacuantica

   As a future teacher, with the article that I read, I saw the negative part of testing. It is not just simply used as to check the comprehension and to know if they learned. We should also be looking at the process on how the student learned. Because I come to realize, that students may cheat on us in pencil and paper exams or test. So does that make our evaluation or assessment accurate?  Definitely not, but then examinations still has a big role in the education system.

 

 

Thanks for this fantastic artlcle.  Where I live not only are pupils tortured daily with grammar but they are also constantly tested.  The education system here is built on the foundation of testing on a regular basis.  Students are so experienced at taking tests that you would think they would excel in the international tests. Unfortunately, the opposite is true.  My feeling is that they are so overwhelmed by grammar and tests that their confidence is destroyed.  

Let's get back to teaching English in order to communicate, understand and be understood.  I am confident that if we do so we will see improved exam results as a consequence.

Submitted by Lavdie Veli on Mon, 03/21/2011 - 21:01

In reply to by janecohen

I think tests have good points and bad ones,too.According to their style of learning many students find it easy to work on test,while some others find it difficult.But tests play an important role in our schools and education system.

They are not only the tests which check the student's knowledge.

Submitted by Butterfly Princess on Fri, 02/15/2013 - 20:10

In reply to by rey_red

How to evaluate students? How could we not possibly frustate them or promote them fairly? If what they learn in the future will depend on they retain or not as learning is cumulative, I wonder if they are ready to go on on this way...

Submitted by Roxy.by.Roxy on Tue, 03/15/2011 - 17:30

I completely agree with your point according to using tests, but in our school and in our school system they dominate. I must say that students are loosing their possibility to think, dream and discuss

Research and insight

Browse fascinating case studies, research papers, publications and books by researchers and ELT experts from around the world.

See our publications, research and insight