What makes a
‘good’ test good?
The test is always a polemic issue, for some aspects must be considered, such as the school curricula, school policies and how teachers face tests because some face a test as a final product of a process, and others see the test as one part of a whole process.
Honestly, I
strong disbelieve in tests as a final product of a process, especially because
it creates a tense atmosphere in which nothing contributes to students’
learning process. As Stephen Krashen has suggested in his Affective filter
hypothesis, students must be comfortable and confident during all the stages of
the learning process, and feelings like anxiety and demotivation can block
comprehensible input.
Krashen
affirms that language is acquired through meaningful communicative
interactions. That is the way I see how tests may be. First and foremost, a
test is just one part of a whole process. I disbelieve in the reliability of a
test in which students stay nervous and anxious before a piece of a paper, and
sat for hours trying to find the correct answer. Language is dynamic and above
everything is communication.
On top of
that, teachers must find dynamic ways (games, quizzes, debates, interviews,
etc.) to test their students. These ways must focus on letting the students be
able to interact, at the same time, with other students and with the content.
Currently, everything done in class prepare the students for tests, not exactly
to acquire a language.
In other
words, what is assessed traditionally could be done dynamically without tension
and anxiety. However, school policies must be respected and followed because a
teacher whose profile does not match the school policy is always a replaceable
teacher. As I have discussed, my greatest struggle is dealing with some
institutions that face the test as a final product of a process, disregarding
that language is communication, not only an object to be studied.
