LANGUANGE TESTING

Lecture:

Mutmainnah Mursidi S.PD.M.PD

Compiler 2:
1. Nur Yolanda Alamri: (18084014017)
2. Sri Utami Warat: (18084014002)
3. Mega seltia: (18084014028)

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION

ENGLISH EDUCATION MAJOR
ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF MAKASSAR
2020-2021
 FOREWORD

Bismillahirahmannirohim
Assalamu alaikum warahmatulahi wabarakatu .

Praise be to Allah SWT for giving us convenience so we can finish this paper on
time . without his help, of course we will not be able to finish this paper properly .
prayers and greetings may best be poured out to our beloved king , the prophet
Muhammad SAW, whom we will later observe in the hereafter.

We give thanks to Allah SWT for the aboudance of his healthy favors , both in
the form of physicial health and mind, so that the writer is able complete the
making of the paper as a task of the ``paragraph writing ``. subject and titled
``ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSE``

We certainly realize that this paper is far from perfect and there are still many
errors and shortcomings in it . for this reason , we expext criticism and
suggestions from readers for this paper , so that this paper can become a better
paper , then if there are many mistakes in this paper , we apologize profusely .

The author also thanks all parties , especially to our lecturer , who have guided in
writing this paper . so hopefully this paper can be useful. Thanks.

Makasar ,oktober 2020

Drafting Team
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD……………………………………………………………………i

TABLE OF CONTENTS…………..………………………………………….ii

CHAPTER I………………………………………………………………….…..1

INTRODUCTION………………………...……………………………….…….2

A. BACKGROUND…………………………………………………….......3
B. PROBLEM FORMULATION………………………………..…….…...4
C. GOALS AND BENEFITS …………………………………….…….….5

CHAPTER II………………………………………………………………..….1

DISCUSSION……………………………………………….…………..….......2

A. DEFINITION OF LANGUANGE TESTING ………………….…..…1

B. SKILL-SPECIFIC TYPES OF LANGUANGE TESTING….………...2
C. PROBLEMS IN LANGUANGE TESTING………….………….…....3
D. ISSUE IN LANGUANGE TESTING…….……………………….…..4
E. ERROR IN LANGUANGE TESTING…….…………………….…....5

CHAPTER III……………………………………………………………...…..1

CLOSING…………………………………………………………………..….2

A. CONCLUSION…………………………………………………....3
B. CRITICAL/SUGGESTION…………………………………...…..4

REFERENCES
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. BACKGROUND

A test is a method of measuring a person’s ability, knowledge, or performance in

a given domain. A test is an instrument or procedure designed to elicit
performance from learners with the purpose of measuring their attainment of
specified criteria. The method may be intuitive and informal or may be structured
and explicit (Brown, 2001). Language testing is the administration of test in order
to assess and measure a person’s language competence and performance or testing
language ability. It is an evaluation of an individual’s language proficiency.

B. PROBLEMS FORMULATION

1.what is definition about languange testing ?

2.what is about skill specific types of languange testing ?
3.how about problems in languange testing ?
4.what does it mean by issue in languange testing ?
5.anything error in languange testing?

C. GOALS AND BENEFITS

The purpose of making this paper is, so that readers can know about problems in
language testing and the meaning of language testing. This paper provides an
understanding to readers so that they can know it.

CHAPTER 11
 DISCUSSION

A. DEFINITION OF LANGUANGE TESTING

Language tests are formal instruments of assessment. They can be used either to

measure proficiency without reference to a particular programme of learning or to
measure the extent to which learners have achieved the goals of a specific course.

= Types of Language Testing

Language Proficiency Tests

Proficiency testing measures a person’s level of skill in a language, independent

of how they learned it. Whether someone grew up speaking Spanish or took
lessons as an adult, a proficiency test should score that person the same. Because
the Parrot language test is built for the workplace, we designed it to measure
proficiency.

Aptitude Tests

An aptitude test does not measure how well someone uses a specific language, but
how well they acquire language skills in general. For that reason, you might use
this type of test when selecting candidates for a role that would require them to
learn a new language.

Diagnostic Tests

Proficiency tests usually provide a general assessment of a person’s full language

skillset. In contrast, diagnostic tests identify specific strengths and weaknesses
within that skillset. Use this type of test to identify specific ways to improve.

Placement & Achievement Tests

These tests are used exclusively in language learning environments. A placement

test measures skill in order to group similarly skilled learners together. An
achievement test measures a learner’s progress over a period of time.
 B. SKILL-SPECIFIC TYPES OF LANGUANGE TESTING

Language can be spoken, heard, written, read, understood, interpreted, translated,

and more. While a comprehensive test that measures all these skills may be
possible, it would be very hard to administer. such a test would provide far more
information than needed for most situations. For that reason, most language tests
isolate one of the four major skill forms: speaking, listening, reading, and writing.

Language Skill Forms

Speaking

Speaking refers to the expression of language, either vocally or through  It is the

most commonly required skill in the workplace. Very few positions do not require
speaking in some form. To test speaking, a person is asked to speak in the testing
language, usually in response to prompts. Depending on how the prompts are
delivered, a speaking test may also require those being tested to listen or read, but
not necessarily in the language being tested.

Listening

Simply put, listening is the reception of speech. A listening test is different from a
hearing test in that a hearing test measures how well your ears receive sound in
general–not necessarily language. You can test listening by having someone listen
to speech and demonstrate understanding. For that reason, a listening test almost
always requires a minimum level of speaking or writing skill, but not necessarily
in the specific language being tested.

Writing

If speaking is the expression of thought through language, writing is the

expression of language through symbols. A writing test gathers and analyzes
writing samples, usually in response to prompts provided by the test. As far as
language skill is concerned, there’s no meaningful distinction between
handwriting and typing.

Reading

Reading is the interpretation of written language. A reading test provides passages

of writing and gathers the test taker’s responses, either to the passages in general
or to specific questions about the passages.
 C. PROBLEMS IN LANGUANGE TESTING

Language competence includes four skills, namely listening,speaking, reading and

writing. Language competence is an act use real language for communication
purposes. Activities language or competency in working in language is a real
manifestation

someone's linguistic competence. The level of linguistic competence a person is

generally reflected in his language skills.Various aspects of language and
understanding and communicative functions the use of language must be
integrated in language competency tests. That is, through a language test a
person's linguistic knowledge will be measured, but it must be integrated in the
form of understanding and using language naturally and contextually.

Language test that is meant to measure grammatical competence which is the

basic ability to communicate does need to get its own attention. However, he
cannot escape of the communicative function of language, and if enforced will
change into types other language tests that do not measure language competence.
With Thus, a language competency test will take the form of a language test,
understanding,and use of language. Concretely, the language competency test will

involving the four aspects that must be contextual. That is, it must be within actual
usage situation, fair, and in a certain context. If you ignore these points, test all
four language skills it too can fall into isolated and artificial tests.It is precisely
this tendency for testing to be a problem in today's language tests (Brown, 2004:
10).

Today traditional tests are still used in measurement language competence. The
traditional test is here meant to be a test has characteristics that only require one's
activity to choose answer, indicates mastery of knowledge, recall or recognition.
If so, the high and low score of a person is not necessarily all at once reflects the
level of competence.
Since 1945 English Language Education in Indonesia has been carried out
according to
different approaches and methods. These meet the needs of the era. English
language teaching in Indonesia Iias experienced implementation according to the
structural approach until the communicative approach at present. At the time
when the structural approach was dominant, two sigtlificant method? were
implemented, namely, the grammar-translation and the audiolingualmethod. The
tests on English followed the methods that were implemented Tests on Eilglish
language education for the grammar-translation method differed from thosefor the
audio linbml Translation, English composition writing, literary criticism, parsing
exercises,and .language analyses were the test form given according to grammar-
translation method which were characterized by uncontrolled subjective
evaluation.

G o d , valid, reliable, practical andobjective tests, statistical counts and indirect

testing using multiple choice, true-false, matching anconlpletion as well as
objective system of evaluation were carried out following the audio
linguallnelhod.In the next development both the methods and' the forms of
English Language testing lessfulfilled the standard of English mastery of learners
in the era of globalization where communication along nations of different
countries happen very quickly because of the progressmade in the field of science
and technology such as the invention of internet, E-mail, facsimile,became the
creed of tile era lerefore, since 1994 the communicative approach in English
language education has been adopted.

Integrative socio-linguistics, which is the basis of thecommur~icative approach,

is predicted to arm the students with enough language competence to beable to
paform commurrication in various situations and conditions in life.
Communicative Ehglish language tests appear to be very cornplex and difficult
for tested as well as for test designers toconstmct. As an alternative solution to the
problem, this article offers same approaches, techique,and procedures and steps in
constructing the tests, accompanied by clear examples in the appendix.

This book is based on papers and discussions at a Lancaster University

symposium in October 1980 where seven applied linguists met to discuss
problems in language testing. In the Introduction, the book’s editor Charles
Alderson refers to the discomfort felt by many language teaching practitioners
faced with the subject of ‘testing’, given the predominance of statistical analysis
in the field. Nevertheless, Alderson noted increasing needs to clarify issues in
three areas – corresponding to the three main sections of the book:
Communicative language testing, Testing of English for specific purposes, and
Testing of general language proficiency. Within each section there are three parts:
the original article(s), reaction papers and an account of the discussion based upon
tape recordings of the proceedings by Alderson.

This book arose from an occasion in October 1980 when seven applied linguists
met in Lancaster to discuss what they felt were important problems in the
assessment of learning a second or foreign language. This Symposium resulted,
partly because of its informal nature and its deliberately small size, in an intense
discussion in certain areas, a concentration which is rarely possible in conferences
or large seminars. It was felt that the Symposium had been so useful that it was
decided to make the discussion public, in order not only to let others know what
had happened at Lancaster, but also to encourage and stimulate a much broader
and hopefully even richer debate in the areas touched upon. Testing has become
an area of increased interest to language teachers and applied linguists in the last
decade.

Yet as Davies says (Davies 1979) testing has for many years firmly resisted
attempts to bring it within the mainstream of applied linguistics. This is no doubt
to some extent due to historical reasons, as both Davies and Morrow (this volume)
suggest. In the era that Spolsky dubbed the 'psychometric-structuralist period'
language testing was dominated by criteria for the establishment of educational
measuring instruments developed within the tradition of psychometrics. As a
result of this emphasis on the statistical analysis of language tests, a group
developed, over the years, of specialists in language testing.

Testing Experts', popularly believed to live in an arcane world of numbers and

formulae. As most language teachers are from a non-numerate background
(sometimes having deliberately fled 'figures') it is not surprising that they were
reluctant to involve themselves in the mysteries of statistics.

Consequently, an expertise developed in language testing and particularly

proficiency testing, divorced from the concerns of the language classroom, and
imbued with its own separate concerns and values which to outsiders were only
partially comprehensible and apparently irrelevant. Despite the advent of
Spolsky's third phase of language testing the psycholinguistic-sociolinguistic
phase (what Moller (this volume) calls the third and fourth phases
psycholinguistic sociolinguistic and sociolinguistic-communicative phases)
'testing' has not yet recovered from this image of being stubbornly irrelevant to or
unconcerned with the language teacher, except for its embodiment in 'exams'
which dominate many a syllabus (be it the Cambridge First Certificate or the
TOEFL). Teachers who have felt they should be concerned with assessing what or
whether learners have learned have found the jargon and argumentation of
'Testing' forbidding and obscure.

D. ISSUE IN LANGUANGE TESTING

It concerns methods of language testing research and the conclusions to which

that research legitimately leads. Contributors discuss technical as well as practical
aspects. Unavoidably, the advances and refinements discussed here depend
heavily on theoretical reasoning, especially on abstract statistical methods. Much
of the debate centers on the relationship between global and specific properties of
language proficiency. Can global skills be taught and tested? Or is it more
sensible to focus attention on the specific components believed to contribute to
such skills? In response to these questions, some new findings are presented
which have wide-ranging implications for language teaching and testing and the
whole gamut of educational linguistics. In addition , some new issues are also
raised.

For instance, how important are attitudes of examinees toward tests and what part
should they play in testing theory and practice? It seems that the papers presented
in this volume may signal the closing of a brief chapter in the development of
language testing research and the opening of a new one. The issues at stake seem
clearer now, although the answers to the controversial questions may be more
complex than they seemed to be only a short while back. The statistical methods-
especially in contributions from Lyle Bachman and Adrian Palmer, Ed Purcell,
John Upshur and Taco Homburg, Hossein Farhady, and the dean of language
testing research, John Carroll-have advanced far beyond the level of simple
product-moment correlations where many of us language testers began our work a
little more than a decade ago.
For me, this book represents an unusual opportunity and challenge. It is not
without trepidation and long deliberation that I have undertaken the somewhat
unusual task of serving as both compiler and reactor to works which are
sometimes sharply critical of my own research. My decision to go ahead was
largely motivated by my colleagues, who in many cases generously agreed to
offer one or more original papers especially for this volume or to allow the
reprinting of a previously published paper. A number of them were also kind
enough to allow me either to disagree with them or to comment on their texts by
the rather unorthodox method of inserting references to my own notes at
appropriate places directly in the texts of their papers. Naturally, they were invited
to respond to these comments, and some of them did so.

Because of the perceived importance of the debates contained here and because it
is sometimes possible to discern what may be the emerging outlines of a new
consensus, it seemed good to all the contributors and to me as well to offer this
collection of papers in a single volume. It is hoped that the whole enterprise will
provide a firmer basis for research, theory, and practice in the coming years.

E. ERROR IN LANGUANGE TESTING

As we know that Language is a communication tool that has a system as a whole

rules or guidelines adhered to by the wearer. This is not just truefor native
speakers, but also for anyone who wants to use it.So, as in the use of the first
language, a language learnersecond / foreigners are required to know, understand,
and be able to use the system the target language he learns is in the form of
language skills(listening, speaking, reading, and writing) correctly and precisely
asnative speakers. Any deviation from this language system is considered
aerror.However, it is also like learning something new, learnerlanguage will
encounter various difficulties and obstacles in the learning processwhich he lives,
whether arising from within the language itself or from

outside. It is these difficulties which then lead to mistakes.Mistakes are not only a
problem to be facedby every language learner as an actor, but also a material

thought for the teacher as a guide who is responsible for directingthey lead to
better language acquisition. This is where it comes into play error analysis is
carried out in order to improve the quality of the process ongoing learning.
Norrish defines error as a systematic aberrationfrom the rules that apply when the
learner has not mastered something soconsistently using it wrong. Meanwhile,
Jack Richards, JohnPlatt and Heidi Weber define it as the use of a language item-
words, grammar rules, expressions, etc.- by a native speaker or a person being
fluent is seen as a learning error or imperfection.Mistakes are not the same as
mistakes. Corder distinguishes the two clearly, namely that the error (error) is a
language aberration systematic or consistent, while mistakes are deviations
language done by accident. In pronunciation, confusion is commoncalled a lapse.

Errors are caused by competency factors, namely because of learnersdo not

understand or master the target language system it uses.Meanwhile, mistakes or
mispronunciation occur due to performance factors, such as:lack of concentration,
fatigue, drowsiness hurriedness, disheveled work,etc.

Operationally, in making mistakes, learners usually don'table to recognize it. If it

was shown to him the mistake, so was heunable to fix it, even his efforts to fix it
can raises new errors. This is because he doesn't know yetthe correct form of
expression. Mistake are often madeconscious, in the sense that the learner
basically feels himself had not yet mastered the language system he was using so
he was not sure with the truth of the expression he produced. The difficulties he
was going through then encourage him to create his own language or even leave
it. But not infrequently a learner feels the expressionis correct when it turns out to
be wrong. By looking at the type and level of seriousnessof the errors that occur,
it can be estimated how far the level of control learners against .
 CHAPTER III
CLOSSING

A. CONCLUSION

As we know that problems in learning language testing are caused by English

Language Education in Indonesia has been carried out according to different
approaches and methods. These meet the needs of the era. English language
teaching in Indonesia experienced implementation according to the structural
approach until the communicative approach at present. At the time when the
structural approach was dominant, two sigtlificant method? were implemented,
namely, the grammar-translation and the audiolingualmethod. The tests on
English followed the methods that were implemented Tests on Eilglish language
education for the grammar-translation method differed from thosefor the audio
linbml Translation, English composition writing, literary criticism, parsing
exercises,and .language analyses were the test form given according to grammar-
translation method which were characterized by uncontrolled subjective
evaluation.

B. CRITICISM AND SUGGESTION

Thus the paper that we make apologizes if there is an error in our writing, because
in fact the truth comes from Allah SWT and the wrong is from us.
 REFERENCES

file:///C:/Users/MUSLIM

https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/

http://ladanguangonline.weebly.com/kampusku

http://languagetesting.info/whatis/lt.html

https://arerariena.wordpress.com/

https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/cp/article/view/8785

https://publikasiilmiah.ums.ac.id/