中考英语阅读理解测试题型对初中英语教学反拨作用研究_宋雪杰.docx

《中考英语阅读理解测试题型对初中英语教学反拨作用研究_宋雪杰.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《中考英语阅读理解测试题型对初中英语教学反拨作用研究_宋雪杰.docx（25页珍藏版）》请在得力文库 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、Teachers are likely to narrow and ignore the curriculum and activities which have no relationship with the test, thus they distort the course. (Alderson and Wall 1993) Alderson and Wall (1993) argue whether the washback is positive or negative might be independent from the quality of the test. Simil

2、arly, Messick (1996) indicates that a poor test might be associated tith positive effects and a good test with negative effects due to educational factors rather than the quality of the test. As it is universally acknowledged, positive washback has become the first consideration of the test designer

3、s, the negative washback being the main causes of a critical test. We often associate the notion of positive or negative washback with the quality of tests; that is to say, a good test is asserted to generate positive washback, conversely, a poor test is asserted to conceive negative washback. In su

4、mmary, we can9t simply estimate the washback of a test must be positive or negative. The quality of a test canH be the only standards to determine whether the washback is positive or negative. The main responsibility for us to study washback is to find approaches to make full use of the positive was

5、hback and reduce the negative washback. 2.1.3 Theoretical Researches on Washback Since 1980, the researches on washback have been paid much attention by the language testing linguistics. As for theoretical researches on washback, washback hypothesis, PPP washback model, and cover-overt washback have

6、 to be mentioned in this section. All these researches provide a strong foundation for the later theoretical and empirical researches. The theoretical and empirical research will mainly be discussed in the following section, including the positive and the negative washback effect on teaching and lea

7、rning. 2.1.3.1 Alderson and WalFs Washback Hypotheses Alderson and Wall (1993:115-129) are the pioneers to make the comprehensive and embedded research of washback. Based on two primary hypotheses (tests can influence teaching, and tests can influence learning), they proposed 15 washback hypotheses

8、which may affect teaching and learning from the perspectives of teachers and students. In their essay “Does washback exist?”（ 1993)， they classified the following hypotheses: (1) A test will influence teaching; (2) A test will influence learning; (3) A test will influence what teachers teach; (4) A

9、test will influence how teachers teach; (5) A test will influence what learners learn; (6) A test will influence how learners learn; (7) A test will influence the rate and sequence of teaching; (8) A test will influence the rate and sequence of learning; (9) A test will influence the degree and dept

10、h of teaching; (10) A test will influence how learners learn; (11) A test will influence attitudes towardsthe content, method, etc. of teaching and learning; (12) Tests that have important consequences will have washback; (13) Tests that do not have important consequences will have no washback; (14)

11、 Tests will have washback on all learners and teachers; (15) Tests will have washback effects for some learners and some teachers, but not for others. It can be seen that the hypotheses proposed by Alderson and Wall is mainly from the point of views of student-teacher and learning-teaching. After fu

12、rther studying washback, Alderson and Hamp-lyons (1996) find that a test itself will not necessarily has positive or negative washback on teaching and learning. Other factors may also affect the result of washback, such as teaching principles, teaching style. Then they added another hypothese, 6iTes

13、t will have different amount and types of washback on some teachers and learners than on other teachers and learners”. However, Fulcher and Davidson (2007:224) argue that 6iThe possibility of a test, whether it is good or bad, have negative effects which cause the anxiety in the learners and fear of

14、 6 poor results in the teachers, and this might lead to teaching to test9, which an undesirable narrowing of the curriculum From these hypotheses, we know that tests can affected the content, methods, pace and attitudes towards teaching and learning. With more empirical investigations into this rese

15、arch, these hypotheses can be further tested and other elements of washback effect might be more clearly enumerated. These hypotheses raised by the researchers combine the aspects of teaching and learning, providing a standard of pracitical meaning and fundation for future directions of theoretical

16、and empirical researches. 2.1.3.2 Hughess Washback Model Hughes (1989) proposed the PPP washback model based on the effect of testing on teaching and learning (see Figure 2.1). Participants refer to students, classroom teachers, administrators, material developers and publishers. Process refers to m

17、aterials development, syllabus design, changes in teaching methodology, and the use of learning and test-taking strategies. Products refer to what is learned and the quality of the learning (Bailey 1996). According to this model, the nature of a test may first affect the perceptions and attitudes of

18、 the participants towards their teaching and learning tasks. These perceptions and attitudes in turn affect what the participants do in carrying out their work. Expect for the learning result, these processes can inevitably bring some side-effects, such as the reform of the teaching and learning mat

19、erials, the curriculums. PPP washback model not only considers the teachers and students affected directly by the test, but also includes the indirectly affected factor. PPP washbaxk model is more specific and comprehensive comparing with the 15 hypotheses, and it rationally expands these hypotheses

20、. 7 Figure 2.1 Hughess WashbackModel 2.1.3.3 Overt-Covert Washback Prodromou (1995), from a new different angle, explores the washback. According to him, washback is manifested by two kinds of forms, that is, overt and covert forms. The former refers to the explicit consequences of a test. From teac

21、hers5 and students9 action, overt washback usually means doing a lot of papers to prepare for an examinatin. The textbook, exercise-types papers are fovored which are mainly focused on the skilles used in examinations. As for the later, it refers to the implicit consequences. It basically amounts to

22、 “testing a textbook as if it were a testbook， and the “teaching activities are more of an informal assessment than a teaching procedure (Prodromou 1995:15). In short words, covert washback makes teaching like testing. In covert testing, correct answers are valued and errors are penalized; students

23、just answer the questions asked by teachers; there is no deep communication between students and teachers. Prodromou new approach to study washback encourages other researchers to do more researches on washback in order to find methods to strengthen the positive washback and to 8 induce negative was

24、hback. The researches of Alderson and Walls washback hypotheses, PPP washback model and covert-overt washback provide certain theories for the future empirical researches. 2.1.4 Empirical Researches on Washback Since 1990, a large number of empirical researches of different types of tests have been

25、carried out in various settings on the washback by researchers (Shohamy 1992, Alderson & Wall 1993, Watanable 1996, Shu Dingfang 2004). The writer will mainly focus on the empirical studies on washback effect in table 2.1. Table 2.1 Empirical Researches on Washback Researcher(s) content Instrument(s

26、) participants conclusion(s) Shohamy (1992) the effect of three national language test: the Arabic Test, the English Oral Test, and the Reading Comprehension Test interview, questionnaires, and classroom observation teachers In the first year of their implementation, all the three language tests hav

27、e achieved “instrumental impact”. Later, she found that washback can change over time” and “the impact of test is not necessarily stable”. Alderson & Wall(1993) The influence of A new O-level exam on the teaching in class in Sri Lanka classroom observation teachers To some degree, washback effect on

28、 teaching and learning can be positive or negative, and teaching content and materials are more easily subject to test influence, but not the teaching method. Alderson & the existence and interview and teachers and TOEFL does affect both 9 Hamp-Lyons (1996) extent of washback on the English test TOE

29、FL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) in preparation classes. classroom observation students the teaching methods and courses, but the effect varies among teachers Watanable the effect of the interview and teachers the new type translation (1996: prevalence of classroom of the entrance examinat

30、ion 318-333) grammar-translatio n” of the university entrance examination on teaching in Japan observations will not affect all the teachers in the same way. “Teachers factors, such as educational background, personal beliefs, and teaching experience may outweigh the possible effect of the entrance

31、examinations”. Andrew et al. The influence of Oral testing; the students Oral testing can have (2002) oral testing on the result of students English learning in middle schools in Hong Kong video of oral testing; the documents analysis some washback on students learning. The washback is relatively la

32、gging behind, and varies from individuals. Li Xiaoju To see if there questionnaires teachers and Washback of tests is (1990) has been any change in English language teaching in middle schools English inspectors positive on teaching and learning; The suggestions of how to maximize the positive 10 due

33、 to the innovation in MET. washback and minimize the negative washback. Jin yan(2000) the importance of CET-SET to teachers and students, and the overall evaluation of CET-SET. questionnaires inspectors and students CET-SET has the positive washbck on the university English teaching and learning, es

34、pecially the oral English. Yuan Ping (2002) Analyze the relationship between the achievement testing and teaching and learning; making a reseach whether achievement testing can have negative washback on teaching and learning. experiment, questionnaires students Achievement testing can not only promo

35、te to grasp the text knowledge, but also improve their language level. Achievement can have positive washback on language teaching and learning. Shu Dingfang (2004) The washback ofNMET Interview, questionnaires and classroom observation Teachers and students The washback of NMET is both positive and

36、 negative on teaching and learning. 11 Tang Yaocai and Peng jinding (2004) the washback of the CET-SET on the college English interview, questionnaires, and classroom observation students The washback of the Oral English in universities is more positive on the attitude to English learning than the E

37、nglish learning content and the learning methods. Qi Luxia the intended interview, constructors The NMET failed to (2004) washback of the NMET in China questionnaires, classroom observation ,inspectors , teachers and students achieve its intended washback. To a large degree, the potentiality of a te

38、st to achieve positive washback effects is determined by the stakes attached to tests Tang the washback of Interview with students The test can influence Xiongying (2005) CET-4 on students English learning in China individuals and groups and questionnaires learners learning attitude, content, speed,

39、 depth, and the washback can varies with each individual From the above, we can summarize that as follows: (1) Tests can have certain effect on teaching content and teaching schedule. But these effects vary with individual teacher; (2) Tests can have certain effect on students, but this kind of infl

40、uence on them varies from individual to individual. (3) Tests can have certain effect on teaching materials; (4) The mechanism of washback effect is restricted by lots of factors. In summary, all the washback researches are focused on these factors: the mechanism of washback effect; the characterist

41、ics of the washback, including the positive and negative 12 washback, the overt-covert washback; how to improve the positive washback, and reduce the negative washback. Though empirical researches on washback have made great achivements in the past two decades, there are still lots of things and eff

42、orts needed to do to enrich the empirical washback. 2.2 Comments on the Previous Research From the above literature review, some findings are summarized below. We can see that an increasing number of washback and impact studies have been conducted over the past 20 years, As for the results of the ab

43、ove empirical researches, almost all of them confirm washback of tests, more or less, in various aspects on language teaching and learning. The researches generally concentrate on three aspects: the working mechanism of washback; the classification of washback; and measures for improving positive wa

44、shback and inhibiting negative washback. The objects of empirical studies on washback are generally those large-scale tests such as TOEFL, IELTS and some important local language tests. Most researchers in domestic research concentrate on the washback effect of CET within the context of college Engl

45、ish teaching and learning. There is a lack of empirical studies on washback of graduation tests or entrance examinations of basic education in China. Its necessary and important to carry out some empirical studies in this field. The present research is attempting to explore the washback of test form

46、ats of English reading comprehension test on teaching and learning in middle schools. 2.3 Overview of English Reading Comprehension Test 2.3.1 The National English Curriculum Standards According to the new National English Curriculum Standards (2011) (NECS), the English courses are set from grade 3.

47、 Following the international practice, the new NECS 13 divides English teaching objectives into nine ability levels. The students should achieve Level 5 at the end of junior secondary school. Level 5 is stated as follows (translated from the National Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education, 20

48、11) 1. The student can infer and understand the meaning of the new words according to the context and word-building; 2. The student can understand the logical relationship of the sentences; 3. The student can read the common forms of reading materials; 4. The student can find out the theme of the ar

49、ticle, understand the plot of the story, and predict the development and the possible ending of the story; 5. In addition to the teaching books, the vocabulary of extracurricular reading should be up to 150000 words; 6. The student can use the dictionary and reference books for learning; 7. According to different reading purposes, the student can obtain the information with simple reading strategies; In order to realize the course objectives, eight teaching principles are provided to EFL teachers as follows (translated from th