跳到主要內容

Glocalization in English language examinations: Aptis and GEPT comparison study

本文與 Rachel Yi-fen Wu、Jamie Dunlea 共同發表於2015年LTTC 國際學術研討會。

Wu, R. Y. F., Wu, J., and Dunlea, J. (2015). Glocalization in English language examinations: Aptis and GEPT comparison study. Paper presented at 2015 LTTC International Conference, Taipei.


Abstract

Glocalization is globalization mixed with local diversity, which illustrates the value of global uniformity while accounting for local differences. One well-known example of this concept is McDonalds, which creates specialized menus for different countries across the globe in order to attract the consumers in the region. However, we rarely find examples of glocalization in international English language examinations such as IELTS and TOEFL, despite the fact that each local examinations market differs uniquely in terms of culture, perceptions of and attitudes toward examinations, purposes of taking examinations, etc. It would be wrong for international examination providers to believe that an examination that works well in the home market will be equally effective in international markets, and an examination that is suitable in the very local market will be appropriate in another one, without understanding the specific market context. Furthermore, an examination provider should investigate what types of modifications should be applied to the
examination. 

Under this remit, an Aptis and GEPT comparison study was conducted as part of the glocalization efforts to provide the Aptis in Taiwan. The Aptis, developed by the British Council, is designed to help organizations and institutions identify the English levels of their staff or students. The GEPT, developed by the LTTC, a local examination center, is the most widely recognized English language examination in Taiwan. Both examinations have been linked with the CEFR, which provides a common ground for the comparison.

The study, jointly carried out by the British Council and the LTTC, also aimed to show how local insights can contribute to the glocalization of an international examination. Equally important, by comparing the locally-produced GEPT with an international examination, the LTTC was able to re-examine the GEPT’s construct and criterion-related validity.

The comparison study aimed to explore the relationships between similar skill sections of the GEPT and the Aptis by answering the following research questions: 
1. To what extent do Aptis scores correlate with GEPT scores?
2. To what extent do the constructs of the Aptis match the GEPT?
3. What are the test-takers’ views towards the Aptis in terms of test tasks?
4. How does the Aptis differ from the GEPT from the perspectives of test-takers?

A total of 146 learners who had taken the GEPT within the previous six months were invited to take the Aptis and complete a post-test attitudinal questionnaire. In addition to quantitative analyses of the score data and questionnaire responses (e.g. CTT, Rasch, correlation, factor analysis, regression), qualitative analyses of the contents of both examinations were also performed.

The paper will report the research framework and preliminary findings. Based on the findings, possible modifications to the Aptis in Taiwan will be discussed. It is hoped that the study will also provide a small-scale demonstration of procedures that global and local test developers can employ in tandem to enhance test usefulness and to result in more beneficial effects on the educational and societal contexts within each region.

標籤：

留言

張貼留言

這個網誌中的熱門文章

何謂測驗信度、效度？ What is Test Reliability and Validity?

原文刊載於 中華民國 91 年 3 月 23 日 《 中央日報．英語教與學 》 國內近來掀起了一股英語能力檢測的熱潮，各種英語測驗紛紛出籠，如全民英檢、托福、愛普、多益、劍橋認證等。這些測驗各自標榜特色，有的強調測驗簡單易考、有的則是強調含聽、讀、說、寫四項測驗的全方位英語能力評量，讓大家真是眼花撩亂。而對有興趣要報考英語測驗的人來說，更是難以做選擇。其實選擇英語測驗就像選購商品一樣，除了功能、價格等因素外，最重要的就是品質了。賣毛衣的商家為了說明商品的品質良好，會說所賣的毛衣絕對是純羊毛做的，而多數人大概也知道如何判斷羊毛衣的真假。相對於賣毛衣的商家，辦理英語測驗的機構會以測驗具有「信度」與「效度」來說明測驗的品質，專業的測驗機構甚至會提出些數據加以補充說明。但是很多人卻連「信度」與「效度」這兩個名詞的意義是甚麼都弄不清楚，更別提判斷其所言的真假了。 事實上，「信度」與「效度」是測驗理論的術語，一般人較感陌生。作者從事「全民英檢」的研發工作，認為測驗單位應有責任提供測驗的使用者（ stakeholders ）有關「信度」與「效度」的資訊，協助大家了解，以便在選擇採用英語測驗時做出正確的判斷。 壹、「信度」（ reliability ） 信度是指測驗分數可靠的程度，也就是這一測驗受信賴的程度。而一測驗為甚麼會受到信賴，關鍵在於結果的一致。同一位考生在能力沒有變化的前提下，在不同時間或不同的測試狀況下重複受測，其所得的分數應該是一致的，否則就產生測驗的誤差。一個測驗有誤差是難免的，但是當誤差過大時就影響了測驗的公平性了。測驗理論上有一個基本假定：實得分數等於真實分數加上誤差（ X=T+E ），但是真實分數是一個未知數。例如甲生考了某英語閱讀測驗的 A 卷得到 80 分，一天後考了 B 卷得了 82 分。雖然有 2 分的差距，但這是可被接受的誤差值，顯示該測驗結果的一致性頗高。又例如乙生考了某寫作測驗，閱卷老師 A 給 60 分，閱卷老師 B 給 62 分，這個結果顯示評分標準相當一致，而測驗的信度自然就高。總之，實得分數與真實分數愈接近即表示誤差愈小，測驗的分數就愈能代表考生的能力，如此，測驗的可信度也就愈高。 貳、「效度」（ validity ） 測驗效度即指測驗分數的正確性，簡單的說，就是指一測驗是否評量到它所要評量的...
張貼留言
閱讀完整內容

「全民英檢」寫作測驗之評分標準與程序 GEPT Writing Tests: Rating Criteria and Process

原文刊載於中華民國 91 年 2 月 10 日 《 中央日報．英語教與學 》 「全民英檢」的初、中、中高級均含寫作測驗，主要目的是評量考生的文字表達能力，也就是語言的使用能力。有別於聽力、閱讀能力測驗之使用客觀題、採電腦閱卷，寫作測驗則是主觀題，需要由專業的評分老師做人工評分。既然是人工評分，則難免因評分老師的個人主觀判斷或個人因素（如疲倦）影響評分。要使寫作評分能正確的反應考生的真實寫作能力，如果排除考生本身的因素，則命題與評分是最關鍵的兩個因素。 為提高評分的一致性（ inter-rater consistency ），「全民英檢」的寫作測驗題型不是「自由寫作」（ free writing ），而是「引導寫作」（ guided writing ），利用圖片、大綱等提示明確的要求考生寫作的內容。這種「引導寫作」的測驗方式有助於降低評分老師的主觀判斷。然而對寫作評分影響最大的還是評分過程。不同的評分老師可能閱了同一篇作文而給了不同的分數，因此如何建立評分者之間的一致性（ inter-rater consistency ），也就是評分的信度（ reliability ）是非常重要的。評分的信度越高，（信度越接近 1 ）表示評分者之間的給分標準趨於一致，評分越可靠。一般而言，信度達 0.85 以上時，就表示評分相當可靠。 「全民英檢」一向重視閱卷信度的確保，採取質量並重的控管措施盡量減低評分者的評分誤差。開辦兩年以來，寫作測驗與口說能力測驗的評分信度均保持在 0.86-0.90 之間，達到不錯的水準。這個數值與大家所熟知的「托福」寫作測驗（ TWE—Test of Written English ）、口說能力測驗（ TSE—Test of Spoken English ） 0.87-0.90 的信度相當。我們是怎麼辦到的？本文特別針對「全民英檢」的寫作測驗評分程序提出說明（口說能力測驗的評分程序與寫作測驗類似，故不重複），希望有助於外界對「全民英檢」的認識。 一、「全民英檢」各級寫作測驗均訂有評分指標（ 0-5 級分），評分人員在確切掌握評分指標後，依據考生的整體表現評分。每一篇作文皆由兩位評分老師分別獨立評分，若兩者評分差距在 1 級分以內，求其平均值；兩者評分差距大於 l 級分以上，則由第三位（資深）評分老師複閱，並以其評分為最...
張貼留言
閱讀完整內容
Rethinking the use of CEFR in Taiwan: What’s next? Jessica Wu The CEFR has been ‘borrowed’ by the Ministry of Education in Taiwan since 2005, aiming to establish a common yardstick against which learners’ English proficiency can be measured. Having been mandated in Taiwan for a decade, the CEFR has had several positive impacts as well as difficulties and problems in its application in the local education context (Chang, 2012; Wu, 2012). Therefore, it is necessary to rethink the use of the CEFR in Taiwan. The paper suggests that the CEFR has been overtly used in testing and assessment in Taiwan, but its significance in promoting transparency and coherence in language teaching and empowering autonomous learning has been overlooked. The paper argues that the current asymmetric application of the CEFR in assessment should be improved to achieve better balance between learning and assessment. While reflecting on our current use of the CEFR, a review of practices in simila...
2 則留言
閱讀完整內容