How to Test Speaking Skills in Japan

24 Part 1: Why should we bother with speaking tests?

As you look upon all that terminology, remember you don’t need to understand all facets of a gem in order to appreciate its value and beauty For now, let’s begin by focusing on the gist of what validity is in practical terms When I talk about the importance of using the right tool for the right job , what I’m really getting at is this idea that tests should measure the language skill(s) you want to assess In other words, a speaking test is valid only if it really and truly measures speaking ability A classic negative washback-inducing error is to test oral com munication via typical multiple choice paper-and-pencil tests This sort of test is not suitable because students do not need to ac tually speak in order to pass Instead, they use other abilities, such as reading and their knowledge of vocabulary and grammar Invalid tests are a big problem because they are a chief cause of negative washback Mendelsohn (1989: 100) chronicles the trap that many teachers unfamiliar with the concept of validity commonly fall into: The unfortunate chain of events leading to negative backwash can go as follows: the classroom teacher does not really know how to design a communicative test of what she/he is teaching. This results in a test that does not reflect the teaching because the teacher has produced a traditional grammar-based dis crete-item test. This will, in time, have a negative backwash effect on the teaching. Practicality It may be obvious, but our assessment activities need to fit within the time and energy we have for conducting them Some types of speaking tests are easier to administer and mark than others For example, you could interview all of your students one by one and