7. Concluding remarks
for test development with the crucial aim of
promoting a better English education and
Based on the evidence from the
learning at institutional level (Jaturapitakkul,
questionnaire surveys, it was found that the
2013; Kucuk, 2007; Kuntasal, 2001; Liauh,
weightage and time allocation of the IET
2011; Nakamura, 2006; Sato & Ikeda, 2015).
are appropriate to the students; therefore,
they can distribute their answers and their
From the findings of this study, this could
time well according to the weight value of
bring some implications and recommendations
each component. Furthermore, the coverage
for both pedagogical and testing aspects.
of English skills and the representation of
For example, lecturers should be concerned
with course objectives from the beginning.
and quasi-experimental designs for research.
Skokie, Illinois: Rand McNally.
Additionally, they should teach and test
Campbell, K. (1996). The world rushes to speak and
in relation to course objectives or what is
write ‘American’ English. London, UK: Oxford
supposed to be measured. Likewise, by finding
University Press.
out that students need to know the question
Carroll, J. B. (1968). The psychology of language
format before the test, lecturers should practice
testing. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
different question formats with students by
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the
behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, New
revising previous tests or practicing some test-
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
taking strategies. Also, providing quiet and
Criper, C., & Davies, A. (1988). The ELTS Validation
comfortable environment helps students focus
Project Report. London, UK: British Council and
and improve their academic performance.
University of Cambridge Local Examinations
Syndicate.
In a nutshell, it is hoped that the findings
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to
from the study have shed light on important
Classical and Modern Test Theory. Philadelphia,
factors which relate to the effect of the process
US: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal
of test preparation and test construction. Most
structure of tests. Psychometrical, 16(3), 297-334.
importantly, it is further hoped that this study
Crystal, D. (2000). English as global language.
will be a contribution to the ongoing efforts to
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
provide more validity evidence for in house
Cumming, A., Grant, L., Mulcahy-Ernt, P., & Powers, D.
English language tests.
E. (2004). A teacher-verification study of speaking
and writing prototype tasks for a new TOEFL.
Language Testing, 21 (2), 107–145.
References
Cumming, A., & Alister. H., Berwick, R. (1988).
Validating in language testing. Clevedon, England:
Alderson, C., Clapham, C., & Wall, D. (1995). Language
Multilingual Matters.
test construction and evaluation. Cambridge, UK:
Davies, A. (1965). Proficiency in English as a second
Cambridge University Press.
language. Birmingham, UK: University of
Bachman, L. F. (1981). Languages for specific purposes:
Birmingham.
Program design and evaluation. Formative
Davies, A. (1978). Language testing: survey articles 1
evaluation in ESP program development. Rowley,
and 2. Language Teaching and Linguistic Abstracts,
Massachusetts: Newbury House.
Bạn đang xem 7. - FACE VALIDITY OF THE INSTITUTIONAL ENGLISH BASED ON THE COMMON EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK OF REFERENCE AT A PUBLIC UNIVERSITY IN VIETNAM
