高考英语听力试题消毒检验——2004年北京卷案例分析

VIP免费

3.0 陈辉 2024-11-19 4 4 806.22KB 114 页 15积分

侵权投诉

A Validation Study on Listening Comprehension Section of the College Entrance Test of English Language

Chapter 1 Introduction

Almost everyone who has experienced the Ivy Tower finds the life there fresh,

unforgettable and, most important of all, enlightening for the rest of entire life.

Nevertheless, to win a membership in the Ivy Tower, one must have gone through a

series of perplexities among which the College Entrance Tests undoubtedly rank in top.

They serve as a threshold curbing out incapable candidates and reserve the limited

resources for those who are both diligent and intelligent enough. The tests are so

decisive in one’s life time that we used to call the month holding this package of tests as

“Black July”. (Now it has been switched to June.)

For the candidates who are going to take the test, they usually will choose from an array

of subjects ranging from physics, biology to history. Or some of the more developed

cities like Beijing and Shanghai will come out with a more comprehensive test

integrating knowledge encompassing fields mentioned above. Yet there are three

constant tests for all the candidates: mathematics, Chinese language and English

language (though a fraction of high school candidates will be tested on other foreign

languages). However, the testing of English language is more or less unique. It differs

with mathematics and physics largely because the latter subjects mainly test candidates’

mastery of solid knowledge and the ability to logically reason. If they fill out the paper,

then they mater and otherwise they do not. On the other hand, the main purpose for the

test of English language is to communicate. (Please see the Syllabus of CETEL in

Appendix I). And to communicate means one’s being able to use the English language

to listen, to speak, to read and write, just as what we do with Chinese language. If we

would like to know if a particular candidate has gained mastery over English language,

then taking a language test is by no means the best way to achieve this goal. Instead,

observation through real life communication with him/her in the language being tested

will be more reliable and valid. Unfortunately, the cost in administrating such an

activity is so expensive that so far no country is known to adopt this methodology. It

seems that getting to know one’s language proficiency by testing is not the best choice

but the only choice.

Chapter 1 Introduction

This only choice leads to many problems in our teaching system. It is often the case that

every year the competition for limited higher education resources is so harsh that the

whole senior high school education becomes heavily test-oriented. Teachers of English

language and their candidates are forced to focus on what the College Entrance Test for

English Language (CETEL) emphasizes. They pursue the test score so hard that, for

most of the time, they forget that the ultimate goal of learning a foreign language is to

communicate and thus pay little respect to the principles in acquiring a second language.

So, most commonly in China, candidates know how to take test with English language,

yet they do not know how to communicate in this language. (For candidates’ opinions,

please see 4.1.2.3) How can we convert an embarrassing situation like this? Or, more

precisely speaking, how can CETEL function as an accelerator to promote dynamic

communicative English learning rather than static, dead learning just for the sake of

taking test?

If we are only allowed to seek for the answer within the testing system, then the most

plausible answer lies in to validate CETEL. The reason why it is so suggested is that,

despite the fact of CETEL proclaiming that it has tested communicative language ability,

the real manifestation does not always support this argument. And to validate this test

means to look for evidence from different perspectives and try to form an overview after

a scientific and systematic research. Then the analytical result can answer the question:

does the CETEL test what it proclaims? If it does not satisfactorily achieve doing so,

how can we improve? The whole process of evidence gathering and analysis is called

“validation” and the measure of to what extent a test is validated is called “validity”.

(For detail explanation, please refer to section 3.1)

To validate a test is a complex project, for on one hand the data collection and

procession can be extremely bewildering and, on the other hand, each language sub-skill

(like listening, speaking, reading and writing) has respective characteristics to be

accentuated and in turn the validations need to base upon different theories. With these

considerations, this paper is devoted only to the validation study of listening section of

CETEL. This is firstly because the fundamental place listening ability takes in Second

Language Acquisition (SLA). According to Wong-Fillmore [1] (1991), for a person to

learn a second language, three conditions must be met:

A Validation Study on Listening Comprehension Section of the College Entrance Test of English Language

1. A learner who realizes the need to learn the second language and is motivated to do

so;

2. Speakers of the target langue who know it well enough to provide the learner with

access to the spoken language and the support (such as simplification, repetition and

feedback) they need for learning it;

3. A social setting which brings the learner in frequent enough and sustained enough

contact with target-language speakers to make language learning possible.

The access to the target language through audio channel is emphasized in two of these

three requirements.

Secondly, listening plays a crucial role in real communication. By Rivers and Temperly

(1978), people almost spend 45% of their time in listening to others; 30% in speaking;

16% and 9% respectively in reading and writing.[2] (Zou, 2005, p: 262-263) So for a

second language acquirer, without sound listening ability, he/she will be basically

“deafened” in foreign language speaking environment.

Thirdly, in our foreign language pedagogy, listening has long been overlooked. It is a

common practice in high school that English teachers have emphasized so much on

grammatical rules that many students are left with an impression that grammar is

scientific formulas used to “analyze” English language rather than “comprehend” this

language. The occasional practice of listening is just something that English teachers

use to kill time with when they have gone too much ahead of the teaching schedule.

Even when students have the chance to listen, the listening activities are more often

test-oriented than interest-and-practical-skills-oriented. This chronic neglect of listening

leads to serious problems plaguing our foreign language teaching mechanism. One of

the most apparent ones is that the students who have learned English for more than 10

years can not understand daily conversation. The curriculum, textbook designers and

language teachers seem to have decided to turn a blind eye to the solid fact that the

listening ability provides the starting point for SLA. Just as people acquire their first

language by hearing and observing, it has been proved that the SLA resembles the same

process, though it is true that at some point the two processes do have different focuses

due to cognition development. [3](Rod Ellis, 2000) The violation of this human nature

Chapter 1 Introduction

will render our English language teaching no more than turning out more “deaf” and

“dumb” learners.

Based on the reasons mentioned above, a validation study of CETEL listening test has

been carried out. The fundamentals in conducting this test are by no means to attack the

CET mechanism, since it does provide millions of the candidates with a chance to

compete. On the contrary, this study is carried out in the hope that CETEL will become

more scientific and real listening-skills-oriented. The listening test of the Year 2004

Beijing Version is selected as prototype test, for it is assumed that the more recent the

test is, the more meaningful the validation study will be. And Beijing, as the capital city

of China often serves as an indicator for how the test should be carried out. The analysis

of demerits in Beijing version is assumed to be crucial in avoiding further

problems ,both in the further versions developed by the same city and those by other

provinces.

§1.1 Configuration of the Study

The whole validation study can be divided into five stages:

1. A comprehensive review of the definition of listening construct, testing theories as

well as the actual testing method of listening.

2. A review of principles in conducting a validation study.

3. The actual validation study of the listening test of CETEL of the Year 2004, Beijing

Version.

4. A study on native speakers’ responses and attitudes toward the test.

5. Proposals for future improvements both in CETEL test paper design and language

teaching process.

§1.2 Significance of the Study

Just as pointed out in above, the main purpose of the study is to answer the question:

“Does CETEL test the communicative language ability that it has proclaimed?” and “If

it does not satisfactorily achieve doing so, how can the test be improved?” Yet, the

A Validation Study on Listening Comprehension Section of the College Entrance Test of English Language

significance of the study is much more than just answering these questions.

Firstly, despite the fact that the College Entrance Testing system has come into being for

more than 25 years and serving as yardstick in measuring candidates’ qualification for

higher education, it has been publicly unknown whether the yardstick itself is qualified

enough to assume this undertaking. Though recent years, some attention has claimed to

be paid to issues like “validity”, “reliability” by the test administrators, there is neither

authoritative publication available on the validation result nor noticeable

rearrangements in the CETEL format. (At lease, it is true for the CET administration in

Beijing) Just as the spirit for higher education is the indomitable pursuit for truth, the

testing system designed to serve for the higher education should also respect truth and

open itself to public scrutiny and criticism.

Secondly, contrary to its importance in real communication and SLA, listening has long

been reduced to an unnoticeable corner in our foreign language teaching curriculum.

This phenomenon can partially attributed to the heavily packed teaching schedules

assigned to high school teachers of English language. Another part of the reason could

be that some of the teachers, especially those elderly, do not have a thorough

understanding of listening ability. This validation test can serve as an alarm for

educators (not just teachers) to reconsider the position that listening ability should take

in SLA and by doing so make pedagogical reform.

Chapter 2 Literature Review

Before conducting a validation study of the listening section of CETEL, we might first

take a look at how the ability of listening comprehension has been theoretically defined

and accordingly how they are tested in practice. A review of this kind will not only

deepen our understanding of this very ability, but will also foster this validation study.

§2.1 Fundamentals of Listening Comprehension

§2.1.1 Language Ability: Unitary or Componential

Linguists and psychologists have long bent over the issue of whether language ability is

unitary or componential. Basing its doctrine on Structuralism and Behaviorism, the

American school holds that language ability can be stratified and thus componential.

This is accountable by the fact that a given language learner can acquire language

knowledge (phonetic, grammar and lexical) and skills (listening, speaking, reading,

writing and translation) to different degrees and demonstrates a variation in proficiency

levels. Therefore, test on componential aspects of the overall ability needs to be

developed to distinguish nuances of proficiency. [4] (Zhang, 1998) Each item in this kind

of language test is written to test language knowledge or skills on a specific aspect

(maybe solely grammar or solely reading). Thus it is often called discrete point test.

On the other hand, the British school, pioneered by Oller, believes in different doctrines.

After extensive statistical research, they argue that language ability is of unitary nature

and candidates’ real language proficiency can only be best reflected in comprehensive

language test in which an item tests more than one aspect of skills. Among all the test

forms, dictation is highly recommended by Oller for its overall exertion on knowledge

of phonology, lexis, grammar and discourse comprehension and organization. (Ibid.)

While both of the two theories seem to hold water to some degree, most of the

authoritative proficiency tests in China like the Test for English Major (TEM), the

University English Test (UET) have adopted the merits in the two hypotheses. They

文档加载中……请稍候！
如果长时间未打开，您也可以点击刷新试试。

下载文档到电脑，查找使用更方便

15 积分 4人已下载

立即下载 VIP免费下载

摘要：

AValidationStudyonListeningComprehensionSectionoftheCollegeEntranceTestofEnglishLanguage2Chapter1IntroductionAlmosteveryonewhohasexperiencedtheIvyTowerfindsthelifetherefresh,unforgettableand,mostimportantofall,enlighteningfortherestofentirelife.Nevertheless,towinamembershipintheIvyTower,onemusthaveg...

展开>> 收起<<

高考英语听力试题消毒检验——2004年北京卷案例分析.pdf

共114页,预览10页

还剩页未读，继续阅读

高考英语听力试题消毒检验——2004年北京卷案例分析

相关推荐

开通VIP享超值会员特权

作者详情

相关内容

推荐作者

热门标签

举报选择: