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
Bạn đang xem 2007) - FACE VALIDITY OF THE INSTITUTIONAL ENGLISH BASED ON THE COMMON EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK OF REFERENCE AT A PUBLIC UNIVERSITY IN VIETNAM