The Interaction among Using Test-Taking Strategies, Level of Language Proficiency, and Test Performance

Subject Areas : Research in English Language Pedagogy

Narjes Ghafournia ¹ , Akbar Afghari ²

1 - Department of Foreign Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2 - Department of Foreign Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch , Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

Accepted : 2017-10-17 Published : 2014-09-01

Keywords: Classical True Score Measurement Theory, True Score, test-taking strategies, Error Score,

Abstract :

This study scrutinized the interaction between linguistic and strategic variables in reading comprehension test performance of Iranian EFL learners. To this end, the interaction among the participants’ reading comprehension test performance, use of test-taking strategies, and level of language proficiency was analyzed. The participants comprised 286 students who answered a reading comprehension test and a test-taking strategy questionnaire. In addition, 25 students participated in a retrospective interview at the end of the study and described their strategic processes of test taking. The findings manifested a significant interaction among the use of test-taking strategies, level of reading proficiency, and test performance of the examinees. The more proficient test takers used the strategies more frequently than did the less proficient test takers. The qualitative findings also confirmed the quantitative findings and revealed the underlying nonlinguistic reasons for the differences in the frequency and type of the strategies used by the test takers. The findings reflected that the observed scores did not manifest true ability of language learners, and true score should be calculated with regard to nonlinguistic variables, particularlytest-taking strategies. The findings provide empirical support for Bachman’s classical true score measurement theory and Bachman’s framework for the factors affecting test performance.

References:

Alderson, J. C. (2000). Assessing reading.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Allan, A. (1992). Development and validation
of a scale to measure test-wiseness in EFL/ESL reading test takers. Language Testing, 9, 101–122.
Anderson, J.R. (2000). Learning and memory: An integrated approach (2ndEd.). New York: John Willeyand Sons.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L.F., & Palmer, A.S. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies and processes in test taking and SLA. In L. F. Bachman, & A.
C., Cohen (Eds.), Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research (pp.90–111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, A.D. (2006).The coming of age of research on test-taking strategies. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3(4), 307-331.
Cohen, A. D., & Upton, T. A. (2007). I want to go back to the text: Response strategies on the reading subtest of the new TOEFL. Language Testing, 24 (2), 209 – 250.
Enright, M.K., Grabe, W., Koda, K., Mosenthal, P., Mulcahy-Ernt, P. & Schedl,
M. (2000). TOEFL 2000 reading framework: A working paper. (TOEFL Monograph Series MS No. 17). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Goldman, S.R. (1997). Learning from text: Reflections on the past and suggestions for the future. Discourse Processes, 23, 357–398.
Gorin, J. S. (2002). Cognitive and psychometric modeling of text-based readingcomprehension GRE-V test items. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.
Gorin, J.S. (2005). Manipulation of processing difficulty of reading comprehension test questions: The feasibility of verbal item generation. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 351 – 73.
Grotjahn, R. (1986). Test validation and cognitive psychology: Some methodological considerations. Language Testing,3, 159-85

Long, M. H. (1984). Process and product in px; "> ESL program evaluation. TESOL
Quarterly,8, 409-25.
McNamara, T., &Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. The University
of Melbourne: Blackwell Publishing.
Nevo, N. (1989). Test-taking strategies on a multiple-choice test of reading comprehension.
Language Testing, 6(2), 199-215.
Phakiti, A. (2008). Construct validation of
Bachman and Palmer's (1996) strategic
competence model over time in EFL reading
tests. Language Testing, 25, 237-272.
Purpura, J. E. (1999). Learner strategy use and
performance on language tests: A structural
equation modeling approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rupp, A.A., Ferne, T., & Choi, H. (2006). How assessing reading comprehension with
multiple-choice questions shapes the
construct: A cognitive processing perspective, Language Testing, 23(4), 441-474.
Sasaki, M. (2000). Effects of cultural schemata on students’ test-taking processes for cloze
tests: A multiple data source approach,
Language Testing, 17 (1), 85–114.
Storey, P. (1997). Examining the test-taking process: A cognitive perspective on the
discourse cloze test. Language Testing, 14,
214-31.
Van Dijk, T. (1985). Strategic discourse comprehension. In T. Ballmer (Ed.). Linguistic
dynamics: Discourses, procedures, and evolution (pp. 30–61).Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter.
Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation: An evidence-based approach.
Oxford: Palgrave.
Yamashita, J. (2003). Processes of taking a gapfilling test: Comparison of skilled and less
skilled EFL learners. Language Testing,20(3), 267-293.