Analyzing Washback Effect of SEPPPO on rospective English Teachers
Abstract
Purpose of Study: This paper reports on a research study in which washback effect of "The Selection Examination for Professional Posts in Public Organizations" (SEPPPO) in Turkey. The findings may illuminate the practice of the authorities who may make a possible modification in this examination in the future.
Methods: In a mix-method design, the data were obtained from 164 student-teachers following a private SEPPPO course. A survey was administered to the participants to reveal certain social and economic effects of getting prepared for the examination. The data gathered in interview sessions were utilized to provide a crystal clear portrait of the prospective teachers’ experiences about the examination.
Findings and Results: The results revealed that The Selection Examination for Professional Posts in Public Organizations (SEPPPO) exerts negative and harmful effects not only on these student-teachers but also on educational faculties and families.
Conclusions and Recommendations: The present study suggests that SEPPPO has serious and negative effects on teacher candidates, on families who financially support them and finally on teacher education programs. The greatest limitation of the examination seems to be the validity since it does not assess any competences critical for English teachers. Necessary measures should be taken so as to modify the examination with the goal of exerting a positive washback effect.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115–129.
Bachman, L.F. & Palmer, A.S. (1996). Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Baker, E. L. (1991, September). Issues in policy, assessment, and equity. Paper presented at the national research symposium on limited English proficient students’ issues: Focus on evaluation and measurement, Washington, DC.
Biggs, J. B. (1995). Assumptions underlying new approaches to educational assessment. Curriculum Forum, 4(2), 1–22.
Biggs, J. B. (Ed.). (1996). Testing: To educate or to select? Education in Hong Kong at the cross-roads. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Educational Publishing.
Brown, J.D., & Hudson, T. (1998). The alternatives in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (4), 653-675.
Cheng, L. (2004). The washback effect of a public examination change of teachers' perceptions toward their classroom teaching. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe, & A. Curtis (Eds.), Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods (pp.147-170). Manwah, New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
Cheng, L. (2005). Changing language teaching through language testing: A washback study.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, A. (1985). Follow my leader: Is that what language tests do? In Y. P. Lee, C. Y. Y. Fok, R.Lord, & G. Low (Eds.), New directions in language testing (pp. 1–12). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Eurydice (2008). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA P9 Eurydice).
Eurydice (2009). Higher Education in Europe 2009: Developments in the Bologna Process. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA P9 Eurydice).
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. New York: Aldine.
Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15–21.
Madaus, G. F., & Kellaghan, T. (1992). Curriculum evaluation and assessment. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 119–154). New York: Macmillan.
McEwen, N. (1995). Educational accountability in Alberta. Canadian Journal of Education, 20, 27–44.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13– 103). New York: Macmillan.
Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing, 13, 241– 256.
Nolen, S. B., Haladyna, T. M., & Haas, N. S. (1992). Uses and abuses of achievement test scores. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 11(2), 9–15.
Popham, W. J. (1987). The merits of measurement-driven instruction. Phi Delta Kappa, 68, 679–682.
Shepard, L. A. (1990). Inflated test score gains: is the problem old norms or teaching the
test? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9, 15-22.
Shepard, L. A. (1993). The place of testing reform in educational reform: a reply to Cizek.
Educational Researcher, 22 (4), 10-14.
Shepard, L.A. (1997). The centrality of test use and consequences for test validity.
Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16 (2), 5-13.
T.C. Yüksek Öğretim Kurulu Öğrenci Seçme ve Yerleştirme Merkezi. (2010). Retrieved on
September 18, 2010, from http://www.osym.gov.tr
Taylor, L. (2005) Washback and impact, ELT Journal, 59(2), 54–155. Retrieved on September 4, 2010 from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org
Wall, D., & Alderson, J. C. (1993). Examining washback: The Sri Lankan impact study. Language Testing, 10, 41–69.
Wall, D. (1997). Impact and washback in language testing. In C. Clapham & D. Corson ( Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Vol. 7. Language testing and assessment (pp. 291–302). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Wall, D. (1999). The impact of high-stakes examinations on classroom teaching: A case study using insights from testing and innovation theory. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Lancaster University, UK.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2022 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies