Professional Documents
Culture Documents
the
ons.
oral
la8e
testing to teaching
:in
la8e Luke prodromou
{viv
l the
:ds.)
The
3lish Teach: lf you teach someone something you give them instructions so
they know about it or how to do it; you make them think, feel or act
lslve in a new or different way; you explain or show students how to do
ols'.
something. (Collins' COBU lLD Dictiona ry].
tof Test: To find out how much someone knows by asking them questions.
,a8e
(Longman's Active Study Dicti ona ryl.
age
'Teach' and 'test' are quite close together in a dictionary, but in testing we
do different things from the things we do when we teach. This artcle
assesses the concept of'backwash' in language teaching, looks at the
consequences of testing on teaching in a broad educational context, and
ics suggests that'negative backwash' makes good language teaching more
in
nd
difficult. The two processes of testing and teaching are considered to be
in necessary but distinct. A system is described for distinguishing between
them which s then applied to developing classroom activities for
rd examination preparation classes, to help teachers move from testng to
of teaching procedures.
t!,
rd
rd what is the The backwash effect can be defined as the direct or indirect effect of
backwash effect? examinations on teaching methods. According to the effect of
examinations on what we do in the classroom we may refer to 'positive'
and 'negative' backwash (Heaton l990: l70, Hughes l989: l). Although
it is an important factor in classrooms wherever examinations play a
dominant role in the educational process, it has not been fully explored. It
is not mentioned in the indcx to such standard ELT handbooks as sterrt
(l983), Howatt (l984). or Hanrrer (l99l), and reference books such as
Richards et al. (l985) and Seaton ( l982) do not corrsider it worthy of an
entry. Heaton ( l990) and Hughcs ( l989) discuss, rather sketchily, wlrat I
refer to as 'overt' backlvash (see below). but do not explore the broader
educational implications ol' 'co\,crt' backwash. The nrost thorough
treatlnent oi'the cottcept ol'backwaslr is that ol Alderson and Wall ( l993).
*,lro suggest that'washback'as tlrey call it, is nlore complex than has
hitherto beerr assunred. They makc the valid point that thele is no otle-to-
one relationship between tests. good or bad, and tlreir efl'ect on tlre
classroonr. In their view. bebre a test has any inrpact orr classrocltrr
practice it is nrediated by f actors such as the place ol' exanritlatiotts iIt
particular societies, the teacher's competence, and tlre resources available
within the school system.
ELT Journal |blunrc 49l l .lunuury l995@ O.rJord Unilersitt, Prcss l995 l3
EF^.-., ,"
i "" :,"q,1.s!r.?l!ffiqr,.w,?ry l
t
l
I
I
I
i
teacher, trainer, examiner, and writer of tests and examination-related
materials. The backwash effect described here is based on my observation
of examination classes in the private and public sectors, over a period of
twenty years, in a society (Greece) where examinations play a very
significant role.
The Professional neglect of the backwash effect (what it is, how it operates,
consequences of and its consequences) is one of the main reasons why new nrethods often
backwash fail to take root in language classes. Many teachers, trapped in an
examination preparation cycle, feel that communicative and humanistic
methodologies are luxuries they cannot afford, When the market calls on
teachers and institutions to produce quantifiable results, it usually means
good e-raminalion results. Sound teaching practices are oien sacrificed in
an anxious attempt to 'cover' the examination syllabus, and to keep ahead
of the competition. In summary, 'negative backwash', as experienced by
the learner, means larrguage learnirrg in a stressful, textbook-bouncl
environment.
The value of It goes without saying that tests and examinations-at the right time, in
testing the right proportions-have a valuable contribution to make in assessing
learners' proficiency, progress, and achievement, As a device for
diagnosing learners' eTors, and for definin_e the interlanguage of
irrdividuals and groups of learners, they are indispensable. Tests are also
tlre simplest and most e fective folm of extrinsic nrotivatiorr. of imposin_e
discipline on the most unruly class, and of ensuring attention as well its
regular attendance. Because they are closely bound up rvitlr classroom
authority, tests invariably lead to teacher-centred lessons. especially
whcre the teacher is inexperienced or insecure.
uses and abuses Abuse of testing occurs when tests invacle esse rrtial teachirrg space, when
of testing they are not the final stage o1 a process tll' learning but beconre the
begirrning, nriddle. artd end o1'thc rvho|e pr()cess. Testing nlay be a short
cut to c.\/,i/l.sic ntotivation. but cotrslar]t resort to it is an adnrission of tlre
teacher's t'ailure to nrake inrinsit,l1,1otivirtitl11 w,ork. ln the lorlg rurr. it rvill
derrrotivate thc learner.
Overt backwash J'lrc backwirsh cff'ect carr be ovct,t or covert. ln its overt ttlntts, it usuall1,
nlcans dtling a lot ol'past papers in class as preparation for att exanrinatiorr:
il rrrav involvc rcpliclttine. 1iom past papers or the textbook. the exercise-
i] l.ukt l>rtnlrtltttttt
ll
Covert backwash The explicit consequences of the backrvash effect are easily identifiable.
The implicit consequences are more elusive, and more disturbing. Even if
examination boards reduced the number of boring multiple_choice
exercises, the examination class would still be in conflict with the
teacher's desire to teach communicatively and humanistically. This is
because covert testing will always be with us. It is a deep-seated, often
unconscious process, which reflects unexamined assumptions about a
wide range of pedagogic principles: horv people learn, the relationship
between learner and teacher, the nature of teacher authority, the
itrrportance of correction, the balance between form and content, the role
of classroonl management, and so on.
Basically. covert testing amour]ts to teaching a textbock :: it' it were a
csbook.Usually the teacher is not full1, aware of this process: in his or
her mind there is a clear dividing line between a lesson which involves
tcachirrg and one rvhich involves testing. I anr using the latter ternr irr a
specific scnse rvhich includes both overt and covert backwash eft'ects.
Stlntc r'xatrrples of covert testirrg will shorv what I mean. I have observed
trtarty lcssons where the teacher asks a question, receives a corTect answer
|'rotrt a particular student, and then moves on to ask the next student the
next question. The objective of this routine is to find out what the students
know. This. ancl the lack of involvemetrt of the rest of the class in the
sequence. makes thc activity trrore of an infomlal a.c..rrl(,rl than a
tcucltitt3 proccclure. The absence of an;, lead-irr or bllow-up to tlre work
doIte on it tcxt is entirely typical of testing procedures.
'l'ltc ba<,kwu.rlt L,|'|'ct t. ttstitti4 ttnl tt,ucltitt.q 1.5
{
I
I
Irad-ins and follow-ups have become standard teaching devices (see Peck
1988: 201, where he refers to them as 'heads and tails'). The pedagogic
rationale of a lead-in is to arouse interest and draw on e students'
I
l
I
knowledge, thereby making leaming 'easier'. By drawing a personal
,:::]-1l
response from students, a follow-up will help fix or anchor the new input in
"]
a - j'::t
the leamers' memories. A good teacher maximises the leamers' chance of
success by pre-teaching vocabulary, and doing pre-listening and pre-
reading tasks to motivate leamers, activate their past experience, and draw
on their potential for more effective leaming strategies. This approach
could not be more in contrast to the standard ritual in classroom tests and
public examinations, where the teacher simply gives out the papers, and
instructs students to 'get on with it' in silence.
Penalizing error Testing values correct answers, and penalizes erTor. But in teaching we
should be as interested in the process by which students arrive at the
wrong answer as we are in the correct answer itself. Holt (1964: 142-3)
described how the process of'only the right answer' ignores the stage
individual students have reached in their learning, and imposes on them
models of performance based on the 'good' leamers in the class. In
testing, the good learner is a yardstick by which all students are measured;
in teaching, the student is his or her own-yardstick. This is important:
covert testing occurs whenever we do not give individuals their own space
and time to answer questions; it is in subtle, invisible ways like this that
we set up students to fail. Failure may be an inevitable feature of the
discrinrirration required in testing procedures, and the classroom
hierarchies this leads to; in teaching, however, discrimination in the
negative sense has no place-for the good language teacher, success in
tests should be as routine as failure.
Asking questions In overt tests, the teacher or the examiners ask a lot of questions, but
students taking public examinations, for instance, are expressly
discouraged from doing so, unless there are exceptional circumstances. In
covert testin_s, too, the teacher asks a lot of questions, while the students
are not given much opportunity to ask questions (of the teacher or each
other). A teaching procedure, on the other hand, allows students to
exercise the power of asking questions; question-asking is accepted as an
assertion of personality that can give a boost to self-confidence. It is
synlptonratic of the psychclcg1, t'conventional testing that questions are
discouraged, and worryin.q i noic how trfien teaching mimics the mono-
interrogative mode of public examination, with parallel systems of
teaclrcr authority and student submissiveness.
Denying learners' In covert testing less able learners are penalized by the collective
thinking tinle asstrtrrption that the objcctive of teaclrer questions is to elicit the ri_eht
ilns\l,er in the shortest possible time. Thus, good students shout out the
ans\\,ers. put their hancls up irst, ill in the pauses created by 'slower'
lcarncrs searchin_e for tlrc. right answer. Tcstirrg ablrors pauses, which it lnl
cr, as a vacuulTl rather tlran a necessary space in which students find their
orr lr lcvel.
The wa1, wc use space irr class is as important as the texts we cl-toosc atrd
:ollective the nlethodologv we adopt in presenting them. An arrangement o'dcsks.
the right appropriate in the context of objective assessment, when tratrs'erreci to
]t out the ever),dav tcaclrirrc, may obstruct the process of leanring.
'slorver'
. which it lnflation of teacher Testin_c. ovcrt and covert is, as Fabian (l982: 24) has arguecl, a
ind their authoritY paternalistic. tcacher-centred business: 'Examinations-like clerrrocratic
institutions--do lrot thrive in isolation. when the consulller and the
Thc lruckttuslt (|'ct,t: t,.sting altd rcat,ltiltg l7
community at large surrender to academic technicians their right and duty
to be involved, they also surrender their right to check on the teaching
strategies that are the direct result.'
The premirrm placed on the 'right answer' in both overt and covert testing
inevitably adds to e inflaon of the teacher's authority, based on his or her
role as arbiter of correctness. One of my main arguments is that we need to
move away from is relationship towards a leamer-centred approach to
testing, and I will give examples of how this can begin to happen.
FaiIure and Tests itre clesigrred to cliscrinrinate proficienc},. lli. ,1,! |,c(. ar.d acIlie vcrrrent.
success Inclccci. sollle tcsts wctu[d be rcgardcd as irrcliicieIlt il'all carrdidates
t,rijovctl ctltrltl sttcccss. This is intlocetrt etttluglt. ancl. irt aclrrlirlistrative
tt-1,1lls, r,crv useful. Il does. horvcl,eL. te,t-td tcl c1-1c(),.tl,itqe a vicrv o'sttrclenls
lts'gotlci 'tlI"baci'.'strong'or'rveak'. Sucil a ciltssilicatitltt nlay,bc the
1il,st stcp tttu,ards a fhtalism that assul-Iles s()ll](] \ttl(lellts are btlrn to fail
ltttcl tlthers i,ll,c'|laturltl'language leartlers. Tlte i ictirn olthis i\lanichaeaIr
r icrv tll't}r., clltsst,oclt-t,t ivorld is usualll,tlre s<l-clrllctl 'bacl 'lcltrIlt-r. wlro is
Textbook input Anxiety about covering the examination syllabus means teachers are
versus learner afraid to take risks with material not manifestly related to the
input examination; students may also become impatient with material which
does not seem to be in the form of examination practice. This has multiple
consequences: textbook and teacher input are the order ofthe day, and the
material chosen may be irrelevant to learners' personal needs or culture;
even when the material is potentially interesting it is not taught for content
but for form, as this serves the narrow requirements of examination
preparation.
One-dimensional or anaemic textbook/teacher input is to some extent
inevitable when the public exanlination is also an international
exanrination. available in countries with widely differirrg cultures.
Challenging and culturally relevant material is watered down on the
principle of the lowest coIrrrron denorrritrator. Examination material will
tend to reflect the culture in which English is spoken as a first language.
The problern of alien and alienating content is a parallel one to that of the
'global textbook', but in an even more acute form. The remedy might be a
greater use of local and learner input, but this is an option rarely adopted
by teachers and students straitjacketed by examination syllabuses and
materials: material that will not 'come up in tlre exams' will rarely be
'brought up' in class.
The discourse of The content of texts used in exarrrination prcparation is not orrly
examination texts inrpersonal and culture-bound. it is olien a peculiar variety o1'English,
u,hich is neither fact not fiction. Test itenrs like the tbllowing are utrique to
tlre exanritratitlrr gcnrc -they are literally corrtext-less and col1lel]t-less,
about nothirr_9 arrd nobocly in partictrlar:
1 I'd like to visit Inclia rnore than any othet,coulltry in the rrtlrld.
India is
2 The light to M osco\\, lasted three antl a lrall'ltours.
It took
PronouIts in English usually re'er to stltrrcl,1ody or stltrrething previously
Irretrtionecl. btrt (he prollotlll iIr sentetrcc I rcl'ers to ncitlrer: it is pure fotm.
We clo ltot kn<lw rvlro the 'I' r,e'crred trl is. attcl rve rvill tlel,er kttclrv rvlry he
tlr slre rvould like to l,isit India.
]() I-tt kc [' n l l rt,ltt, ltt
The definite article in sentence 2 is tantalizingly specific, but in fact the
cohesion is misleading: there is no flight, definite or indefinite; there is no
context to which this text belongs and to which we can refer if we want to
know more. It is difficult (though not impossible, as I will show later) to
relate these propositions to a linguistic or real-world context.
Functionally, we do not know whether these texts are parts of a narrative
or argumentative text.
Solemnity versus Humour, like context and content, is considered inappropriate in testing.
humour
Tests cannot be funny because there is not thought to be room for humour
in the solemn ritual of the examination process. Thus, testin_e becomes a
pretext for numerous practices which in any other pedagogic context we
would reject out of hand as inimical to good language learning.
product and
The two methods of imparting language that I have referred to as testin_E
process
and teaching differ in one overarching essential: the first focuses almost
exclusively on the product (the language to be taught), while tlre second
aims to make the process of imparting language both interesting and
fulfilling. In the former, the learner's potential, both linguistic and
personal, is downgraded; in the latter, it is encouraged. The obsession
with the linguistic product, and the sacrifice of rich pedagogic processes.
is usually accompanied by cries of 'We don't have time', 'I nust finish the
book', 'Cover the syllabus', etc. Preoccupation with the errd-product i
obscures the importance in langua_ee teaching of two factors nlentioned
earlier: classroom nlanagement and rapport. If the exanrination syllabus ]
and its accompanying exercise types are the destination for many i
l
teachers, the process by which the1, reach that destination is the journey: I
t
have been arguing that this journey, which depends so much on good
management and rapport, should be both enjoyable and educatiorrally t
satisfying.
Transferring
Tests and cxanrinatioIts arc llol gtlillg to go awayl the prtlcluct, both
testing linguistic and commcrcial. will continue to be packaeecl. nrarketed, and
procedures to
sold. Any suggestiolls clnc nrakes concerning the transf'er fronr testittg
teaching procedures to teaching procedurcs nrust tirke this 'act ol educational lif'e
procedures
irrto accourrt. Tltc cxantplcs I givc in the inal part of tlris paper arc based
on excrcise types conlr]ltlrtlv uscd irr cxarrlitrations. I wiII tr1, to slrow horv
the nrost unpronlisin_e tcstirtg nlalcrial Irriglrt be trrade into a nlOre
challenging vchiclc <l'pcrstlnal cxprcssitltt. with<lut tlre teaclrl,r lravirlg to
abandon tlrc botrk or the syllabus.
Tlrc overall principlc bclriIrd thc tcchniques tlescribed beloir is the shiti
fiotrr teacher control to studcllt ctlntrol. The tasks will theretbr.e itrvtrlve
the use of learrrcr input. rvhich l 'ce-l is a key elenrent in trlnsforrrlirlg
negative inlo ptrsitivc bltcku'aslt artcl irt ntaking cxaIlrinat,ioIr prcpirrittioll
more of an educaliorral activity than it is at present in rlrost exanritlatiorl
classes.
'f
ltc lxtckv,u.slt c|'<,< t, It'.tIitti tttttl lcut,ltitt,: ]l
1 The examiner's hat
(i) Students complete sentence-level multiple-choice, gap-filling, or
transformation exercises in the conventional way.
(ii) Students rewrite the test items to reflect their personal views, using
the textbook or testbook as a guide. Thus, if an original sentence in
the test says 'Stamp collecting is the most enjoyable hobby I know',
students can replace either the subject or the adjective with items of
their choice. Students may also replace impersonal or'non-existent'
subjects such as 'he', 'she'. or 'John', with the names of friends,
people in the class, members of their family, or famous people, or
make the sentence interesting or amusing in any way they wish. The
objective in each case is to make the utterly forgettable original
sentence become memorable in some way.
(v) The teacher checks and gets feedback on the fornr and in particular
on the content of the sentences.
2 Gender bending
(i) Get students to rewrite sentence-level multiple-choice atrd
transbrmation exercises by asking them to change all -enriniIre
subjects into masculine and vice versa. The results will be both
surprising and memorable.
(ii) Focus on content: consider whether the resulting Sentences are (a)
coTect (b) acceptable. A lively debate will invariably ensue as. for
instance, when 'He's such it nauglrty boyl it's anrazing what his
nrother lets him get away rvith' bccomes 'She's such a naughti, girl:
it's antazing whlt lu,r |tltt,1, Ic-ts /tcl,gct away wi{It' tlr wlren 'Havirrg
laid tlre table . Mrs Jclncs called tltc 'aIrrily to supper' becortres 'Havirtg
laid the iablc. Ml,Jottcs callcd tlre tarrrily to supper.'
(iii) Ask stuclents to sumnlarize tlrc results of this excrcise irrto a clrart
sinrilar to Table 2. (l'his is a snral| santple basccl orr ,"r ltttthc,ntic.
international public cxlrrlrirratiorl! ).
(ir,) Ask students ttl w,ritc ltll ilrgtlIllL,lllalive ctlIlrposititln on eqLralit1,of Ma
tltc scrcs birscd otr tltc 'tllrla' givcn irl ]'a[rlc 2. tr
3 Transormation tennis
]'hc lilllorving exercise brcaks dorvrt thc 1)attcrl1 tr' scrriccl rarrks ol'
\tu(lcl]ls-hcacls in bocrks. lto L,\,c c11111xcl-bl, usirtg tlre, classrotttrt space
lt. lt kilttl ol' r,crbal te llnis c()tll,t.
2)_ 1 _11 l;1 |) 1.7 al 1.a lnt t u
Table 2 Males Females
sentences, etc.).
ctltr lt l it r tl l Management N4,v suggestions tnay seem to inrply that tlre problent of rtcgative
techniques backwash is one of course desigrr and nretlrodolog;,. It is. horvcvcr.
espccially in its covert lortns, chiefly a problern ol attitudc ancl rapptlrt,
Teachcrs express attitudes towards learning not onl;, irr tlteir choice o'
n]aterials arrd methods. but also in their approach to classroottr
ccl rltrrks tll' rrlanagcnlellt. This discipline-wlrich involves the use ol' tiIlrc. space,
Sr()Olll s[)ilcc voice. arld _geture-\\,eaves subtle messages wlrich catt l-Ilotivate or
cletncltivate a class. For this reason I woLrld likc to errd with a briel'
'f
ltc llut,kl,uslt af|'cct: tt,stitt14 ttttd lcucltitt3 j_)
Beferen
checklist of management tactics which will tend to mitigate some of the Aldersor^
features of testing, and encourage an ideology of co-operative learning. exist?'
Fabian, I
patema
Fro- 1 When you ask the class a question, allow the 'weaker' students some Testing.
choice to ^uittipt"
personal thinking time--do not make question and answer routine a race to the Gerngros
choice right answer. Cramm
Harmer,,
Teachin
2 Do not stand too close to the student who is answering the question, Heaton, J
thereby excluding the rest ofthe class: use space and distance to create London
an inclusive, group feeling. Holt, J. l,
Penguir,
Howatt,
3 When you get a 'right' answer do not just move on to the next item:
Langua,
ask other students 'Do you agree?', 'What have you got?' Do not Press.
reveal the right answer too soon. The process is as important as the Hughes, i
product. Cambrit
Peck, A. l
4 Give students time to look at questions before they listen or read-this Prentice
Richards,
will make the task more directed, and help develop skills rather than Longnu
merely test them. London
7 Avoid saying things like 'work quickly', or'you've got one minute to
do this-hurry up'.
8 Anange desks in such a way that students can see each other and make
eye contact.
]i
-{ Lukc prtulnlnulu
)f the References Richards, J. C. 1990. The l,anguage Teaching
ling. Alderson, C. and D. Wall. 1993, 'Does washback M atrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
exist?' Applied Linguistics 1412: 1L5J9. Rubin, J. 1987. 'What the 'good language leamer'
Fabian, P. l982. 'Examinations: why tolerate their can teach us'. TESOL Quarterly 9l|: 41-5l.
patemal!m?' in J. B. Heaton (ed.) Language Seaton, B. l982. A Handbook of English Language
ome Testing. London: Modem English Publications. Teac hin g Te rms and P rac tic e. London : Macmil lan.
:o the Gerngross, G. and H. Puchta. 1992, Creative Stern, H. H. |983. Fundamental Concepts of
Grammar P ractice. London: Longman. Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Harmer, J. l99l. The Practice of English l-anguage Press.
;tion,
Teac hing. London: Longman. Wenden, A. 1987. 'How to be a good language
Heaton, J. D. 1990. Writing English l"anguage Tests. leamer' in A. Wenden and J. Rubin (eds.) Learner
:reate London: Longman. Strategies in Language Learning. Englewood
Holt, J. |964. Hov,Children Fail. Harmondsworth: Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Penguin.
item: Howatt, A. P. R. 1984. A Histoty of English The author
Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
o not Luke Prodromou works for The British Council in
Press.
the Greece. He has been involved in training teachers for
rs Hughes, A. l989. Testing for l-anguage Teachers.
the DTEFLA and DOTE and is an assessor/moderator
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
for these schemes. He has also been a member of the
Peck, A. 1988. Ianguage Teachers at Work. London:
Prentice Hall.
UCLES CTEFLA Schemc Committee and the team
-this
,than Richards, J., J. Platt, and H. Weber. 1985. The working on the new Cambridge Integrated Language
Training Schemes (ClLTS). He is the author of Mr.ted
Longman Dictionary of Applied Ling,uistics.
London: Longrnan.
Ability Classes (Macmillan) and several lextbooks tbr
examination classes.
]roup
l the
lf test
ute to i
!
1
l
make ll
]
rct to
,o thc
,l-rise