the components of test specifications

The Components of Test Specifications

What is the Test component of specification?

• The test component of specifications is a written document that provides essential background information about the planned exam program. This information is then used to focus and guide the remaining steps in the test development process.

• Specifications are generative and explanatory in nature. A key benefit of using test specifications is their efficiency. (Alderson, et al., 1995:2).

What are Specs?

• Test specifications – usually called ‘specs’ – are generative explanatory documents for the creation of test tasks.

specs have the role of a generative blue print, from which many equivalent test items or tasks can be produced.

Specs tell us the rationale behind the various choices that we make.Specs tell us the nuts and bolts of how to phrase the test items.

(Davidson & Lynch, 2002)

McNamara, (2000:31), defines it as ‘a set of instructions for creating the

test’ and its purpose is to ‘make explicit the design decisions in the test and

to allow new versions to be written in the future by someone other than the

test developer’.

What is specs goal in a test?

The ultimate goal of a specs review is to build a stronger validity argument by

identifying issues that might undermine the validity.

Brown (1994:387) simply calls it ‘practical outline of your test’; Brown’s questions, when borne in mind, would aid in writing good test specifications:

Are the directions to each section absolutely clear?Does each item measure a specific item?Is each item stated in clear, simple language?Does the difficulty of each item seem to be appropriate for the students?Does the sum of the items and test as whole adequately reflect the

learning objectives?

Ruch (1929) view point about Test specifications:

He may have been the earliest proponent of test specifications in

educational and psychological assessment.

He mentioned detailed rules of procedures for TS.

He recognized the need for specifications to be immediately relevant to the

local context and test.

He believed that such general statements would probably be impossible.

Hughes, Bachman and Palmer view about test specifications:

Hughes(2003), was an early advocate for increased level of details.

According to him it is not to be expected that everything in the specification

will always appear in the test;

Bachman and Palmer (1996) and Alderson(1995), called for more details

to be included in test specifications, although Bachman and Palmer were

more detailed than Alderson.

Davidson and Lynch’s iterative-based model of Test specifications:

•According to Davidson and Lynch (2002:20), there is no single best format for test

specifications; ‘the principles are universal’. Their specification model calls for test

developers to include a

(GD) general description

(PA) prompt attributes

(RA) response attributes

(SI) sample items and (SS) specification supplement ,if necessary.

Justification for the Test Specifications

Cornerstones: Most commentators consider validity and reliability to be the most important criteria in judging a test’s quality, but there are so many factors into consideration in having a good test that call them ‘cornerstones’ of testing, although Bachman and Palmer caution that it is an impossible task.( Bachman and Palmer, 1996)

Test Specifications Cornerstones:

Validity : The term validity refers to the extent to which a test measures what it says it

measures (Heaton 1988:159).

Reliability: Reliability is concerned with ensuring consistency of test scores.

Practicality: Practical issues include time, resources and administrative logistics; and it

is, perhaps, one of the most important qualities of a test.

Washback : According to Buck (1988), Washback refers to the effect of testing on

teaching and learning.

Authenticity: It is an important criterion to judge a test’s quality; and good testing,

should strive to use formats and tests that mirror the types of situations in which students

would authentically use the target language.

Transparency: Transparency refers to the availability of clear, accurate information to

students about testing.

Scorer reliability: It means clearly defining the weighing for each section, describing

specific criteria for marking and grading. (Weir, 1993, p.7)

Criteria for Assessment:

It depends and will be checked whether the response is relevant to the assigned topic or not, what level of thoroughness it presents.

Rating Scales:Scoring is often taken for granted in language test that the writer, does not

intend to do. Scoring will be:

Analytical: A type of rating scale that requires teachers to allot separate

ratings for the different components of language ability.

Holistic: one based on an impressionistic method of scoring. (Davies 1990)

The components of test specifications for teaching skills:1. Listening

2. Speaking:

3. Reading:

4. Writing:

Conclusion:

References:

Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C. and Wall, D. (1995). Language Test Construction

and Evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996/2010). Language testing in practice.

Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles. New Jersey: Prentice Hall

Regents. pp. 373 – 392

Brown JD and Bailey KM (2008). Language testing courses: What are they in

2007? Language Testing, 25(3): 349–383.

Brindley, G. (2001). Assessment. In Carter and Nunan (Eds.). The Cambridge

Guide to TESOL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.137-143.

Carroll, B .J. (1980). Testing Communicative Performance. Oxford: Pergamon.

Davies, A. (1990). Principles of language testing. Oxford: Blackwell.

Davidson F and Lynch BK (2002). Testcraft: A teacher’s guide to writing and using

language test specifications. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Douglas, D. (2004). Discourse domains: the cognitive context of speaking. In Boxer, D.,&

Cohen, A. (Eds.), Studying speaking to inform second language learning (pp. 25-47). Clevedon, England:

Multilingual Matters.

Fulcher, G. & Davidson, F. (2007) Language Testing and Assessment: An Advanced Resource Book. Oxford: Routledge.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

McNamara, T. (2000). Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In Linn, R. L. (Ed.). Educational Measurement. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 13-103.

Ruch, G. M. (1929). The objective or new-type examination: An introduction to educational measurement. Chicago:

Scott, Foresman.

Cr by: Zahra Bayani