Reflecting Upon One’s Language Testing
AI-generated picture by Prof. Jonathan Acuña in June 2025
Reflections of an EFL Instructor on Language
Testing
Am I well-informed about language testing? Not as much as I wish. I
have limited access to the leading ESL/EFL journals worldwide. Yet, with 66%
of my life spent teaching (I am 50 now), I have learned a thing or two about
language acquisition, instruction, and assessment. Over the years, I’ve
become quite good at navigating classroom realities and making informed
decisions based on my experience and available research.
Recently, I was assigned a Level A General English class for a 14-week
term at a local college. I had to select the most appropriate content items for
the syllabus from a large program pool. I chose those that are most frequently
used in real communication. In my experience, turning content items into clear
instructional goals allows me to control both how I teach and how I assess
those goals during and at the end of the course. This practice aligns with the
principles of outcome-based education, which advocates for setting clear,
measurable objectives as a foundation for instructional planning (Richards,
2001, p.112).
I plan my courses in reverse. I first determine what goals I will assess
in the final test and then align course objectives and learning experiences
accordingly. For this class, I turned 25 content items into SMART performance
goals—specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound objectives
(Doran, 1981)—and included them in the syllabus (or Plan Didáctico in my
workplace). Research has shown that SMART goals help instructors create
clear performance targets and improve alignment between teaching, learning,
and assessment.
From week one, students understood what they would be expected to
demonstrate by the end. While holidays, extracurricular activities, and
administrative interruptions occasionally disrupted our schedule, we managed
to conscientiously work through 16 of the intended learning goals. This kind
of mismatch between the planned curriculum and the achieved curriculum is
well documented in language education (Tan-Sisman, Gulcin 2021). As Tan-
Sisman notes, various contextual constraints often cause gaps between
intended outcomes and what can realistically be taught and assessed within
institutional timeframes.
By the end of the course, I assessed students on all four language skills.
For the final speaking exam, students received a list of the performance goals
in advance, since this was a communicative class where they needed to
demonstrate spontaneous, natural language production. Communicative
testing emphasizes real-world language use and requires students to produce
meaningful spoken output rather than rehearsed or memorized structures
(Brown & Abeywickrama, 2018).
Skills for Level 2
1 I can introduce myself to others
2 I can compare people and objects with -er than
3 I can describe my personality
4 I can describe others’ personality
5 I express degree and intensity of matters with intensifiers
6 I can identify the literary elements in a book
7 I can express obligation and necessity
8 I can write a recommendation letter
9 I can use some phrasal verbs
10 I can express the future in different ways
11 I can express possibilities and probabilities
12 I can make travel arrangements and plan a budget
13 I can narrate events in the past
14 I can pronounce regular verbs in the past
15 I can recognize the main idea and secondary ideas in a paragraph
16 I can produce solo phonemes from the alphabet letters
The assessment process was simple. I called students to my desk one
by one, asked them to respond to up to three random goals, and prompted
further when necessary. My focus was not solely on grammar and vocabulary,
as is common in textbook-based tests, but also on literary elements, functional
language, phonological awareness, and work-related genres. Assessing
across these areas reflects a growing emphasis in EFL on integrating
language nuances—the subtleties and deeper layers of meaning in authentic
language use—into language instruction and assessment (Sulieman, 2021).
Among all sections, I was most satisfied with the assessment of literary
elements. I strongly believe that EFL courses should expose learners to the
language’s literary and cultural nuances. Most students could identify titles,
authors, characters, settings, plots, points of view—and even the climax of a
story. Research supports the view that incorporating literature enhances
students’ interpretive skills, cultural awareness, and appreciation of linguistic
subtleties. For me, this indicated that we successfully elevated their basic
literacy to a higher, more meaningful level.
Conclusion
While I still consider myself a learner in the field of testing, this
experience reaffirmed that well-planned, goal-oriented instruction leads to
measurable, authentic student achievement. It also confirmed my belief in
integrating literature into language learning, even at the most basic levels, to
nurture learners’ capacity to navigate not just functional language, but also the
subtle and rich dimensions of the target culture and discourse.
References
Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2018). Language assessment: Principles and classroom
practices (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.
Doran, G. T. (1981). There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives.
Management Review, 70 (11), 35–36.
Richards, J. C. (2017). Curriculum development in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
Sa’eed, S. S. S. (2021). Impact of Teaching English Literature on the Improvement of EFL Learner’s
Performance in English Language. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 11, 647-654.
Tan-Sisman, Gulcin. (2021). Acquisition of the curriculum development knowledge in pre-service
teacher education. Pegem Eğitim ve Öğretim Dergisi. 11. 355-400.
10.14527/pegegog.2021.010.
