内容简介
《牛津语言学入门丛书：语言测试》是一部有关语言测试基本理论和实践的导论性著作，内容涵盖了测试设计、测试评分程序、测试的效度和信度以及语言测试的社会因素等方面。
目录
Preface
Aurhor's preface
SFCTION I
Survey
1 Testing, testing…What is a language test?
Understanding language testing
Types of test
Test purpose
The criterion
The test-criterion relationship
Conclusion
2 Communication and the design oflanguage tests
Discrete point tests
Integrative and pragmatic tests
Communicative language tests
Models ofcommunicative ability
Conclusion
3 The testing cycle
Understanding the constraints
Test content
Test method
Authenticity of response
Fixed and constructed response formats
Test specifications
Test rrials
Conclusion
4 The ratlng process
Establishing a rating procedure
The problem with raters
Establishing a framework for making judgemenrs
Rating scales
Holistic and analytic ratings
Rater training
Conclusion
5 Valldlty：testing the test
Threats to test validity
Tesr content
Test method and rest construct
The impact of tests
Conclusion
6 Measurement
Introduction
Measurement
Quality control for raters
Investigating the properties of individual test items
Norm-referenced and criterion-referenced measurement
New approaches to measurement
Conclusion
7 The soclalcharacter oflanguage tests
Intfoduction
The institurional character of assessment
Assessment and social policy
Assessment and educational policy
The social responsibility of the language tester
Ethical language testing
Accountabiliry
Washback
Test impact
Codes of professional ethics for language testers
Critical language testing
Conclusion
8 New directions-and dilemmas?
摘要与插图
An important aspect of a scale is the way in which performanceat the top end of the scale is defined. There is frequently anunac knowledged problem here. Rating scales often make refer- ence to what are assumed to be the typical performances of native speakers or expert-users of the language at the top end of the scale. That is， it is assumed that the performance of native speakers will be fundamentally unlike the performances of non-native speakers， who will tend gradually to approximate native speaker performance as their own proficiency increases. However， claims about the uniformly superior performance of these idealized native speakers have rarely been supported empirically. In fact，the studies that have been carried out typically show the performance of native speakers as highly variable， related to educa- tionallevel， and covering a range of positions on the scale.ln spite of this， the idealized view of native speaker performance still hovers inappropriately at the top of many rating scales.The number of levels on a rating scale is also an important matter to consider， although the questions raised here are more a mat-ter of practical utility than of theoretical validity. There is no point in proliferating descriptions outside the range of ability ofinterest. Having too few distinctions within the range of suchability is also frustrating， and the revision of rating scales often involves the creation of more distinctions.
The failure of rating scales to make distinctions sufficiently fine to capture progress being made by students is a frequent problem.It arises because the purposes of users of a single assessmentinstrument may be at odds. Teachers have continuous exposure to their students' achievements in the normal course of learning.In the process， they receive ongoing informal confirmation of learner progress which may not be adequately reflected in a cate- gory difference as described by a scale. Imagine handing parents who are seeking evidence of their child's growth a measuring stickwith marks on it only a foot （30 centimetres） apart， the measurenot allowing any other distinction to be made. The parents canobserve the growth of the child： they have independent evidence in the comments of relatives， or the fact that the child has grown out 'of a set of clothes. Yet in terms of the measuring stick nogrowth can be recorded because the child has not passed the magic cut-point into the next adjacent category of measurement. Teachers restricted to reporting achievement only in terms of broad rating scale categories are in a similar position. Most ratingscales used in public educational settings are imposed by government authorities for purposes of administrative effiaency and financial accountability， for which fine-grained distinctions are unnecessary， The scales are used to report the achievements of the educational system in terms of changes in the prof
