. SECONDLY, A TEST’S COGNITIVE VALIDITY COMPONENT WHICH IS HIGHLY...

2007). Secondly, a test’s cognitive validity

component which is highly recommended

by the researcher is theory-based validity or

can be examined through learners’ perceptions

Cognitive validity (Khalifa & Weir, 2009).

on Listening, Reading, Writing and Speaking

It focuses on the processes that test-takers

tasks in their real life situation (Field, 2011). It

use in responding to test items and tasks. It

can be noted that the two methods in cognitive

should be emphasized that face validity is a

processing will be selected individually, but it

part of cognitive validity in test validation.

is suggested from test developers’ perceptions

This validity requires test -takers to find out if

that whether they want to select the first or the

the internal mental processes that a test elicits

second method, the process of performance

of the test should be more like the process

from a candidate resemble the processes

that he or she would employ in non-test

in the real life. Therefore, it can be said that

investigating face validity is as important as

conditions. Furthermore, cognitive includes

evaluating the content or predictive validity

executive resources and executive process.

of an in-house language test. However, there

Executive resources consist of linguistic

have been still some limitations in previous

knowledge and content knowledge of the

test-taker. The test-taker can use grammatical,

studies in terms of content and methodology.

For illustrations, several studies (Advi,

discoursal, functional and sociolinguistic

knowledge of the language in the test. These

2003; Ayers, 1977; Dooey & Oliver, 2002;

Huong, 2000; Mojtaba, 2009; Pishghadam &

resources are also equivalent to Bachman’s

(1990) views of language components. Weir

Khosropanah, 2011) paid much attention to

investigate the content validity and predictive

(2005) defines language ability as comprising

validity of an in-house test more than face

of two components: language knowledge

validity. To be more specific, the researchers

and strategic competence that will provide

tended to measure test scores rather than

language users with the ability to complete the

other perceptions about knowledge, skills or

tasks in the test. He also emphasizes that there

other attributes of students. Messick (1995)

are two main methods to explore the cognitive

validity. Firstly, cognitive validity can be

emphasized that the meaning and values of

checked through investigating test-takers’

test validation apply not just to interpretive

behaviors by using various types of verbal

and action inferences derived from test scores,

reporting (e.g., introspective, immediate

but also inferences based on other means of

retrospective, and delayed retrospective) in

observing. This means that investigation of

order to stimulate their comments on what they

face validity will create much more validity

often do in Listening, Reading, Writing and

for the tests. For these reasons above, this

study attempts to fill the limitations stated

face validity of an English Second Language

above by employing the qualitative method

Placement Test (ESLPT) by using both

qualitative and quantitative data. The study

to investigate the face validity of the IET at

was conducted with the total of 100 students

a public university in Vietnam in order to

and 55 faculty members at University of

improve the quality of education; pinpoint

Illinois at Urbana Champaign, in the United

strengths and weaknesses in the curriculum

States. A self-assessment questionnaire

and test administrations.

was administered to elicit students’ own