SavedAdd your journal

Journals / IOJET / 2016 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 4

A CONCISE ANALYSIS OF THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE EXAMINATION (YDS) IN TURKEY AND ITS POSSIBLE WASHBACK EFFECTS

Erkan KÜLEKÇİ
Journal
IOJET
Pages
302–315
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

While this paper provides a ground for future studies to examine YDS, it is strongly emphasized that further and detailed research with empirical data on the test is necessary in order to reveal a much more accurate examination.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this paper, some basic information about the Foreign Language Examination (YDS) is presented before the construct of the test is analysed in respect of assessing language proficiency.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Then, the issues such as reliability and validity of the test are briefly addressed, and both current and possible outcomes of YDS are discussed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:While this paper provides a ground for future studies to examine YDS, it is strongly emphasized that further and detailed research with empirical data on the test is necessary in order to reveal a much more accurate examination.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this paper, some basic information about the Foreign Language Examination (YDS) is presented before the construct of the test is analysed in respect of assessing language proficiency. Then, the issues such as reliability and validity of the test are briefly addressed, and both current and possible outcomes of YDS are discussed. Finally, some suggestions for the future direction are presented as the necessity of using computer/internet assistance and encompassing more areas of language knowledge and language skills are highlighted. While this paper provides a ground for future studies to examine YDS, it is strongly emphasized that further and detailed research with empirical data on the test is necessary in order to reveal a much more accurate examination.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÜLEKÇİ, E. (2022). A CONCISE ANALYSIS OF THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE EXAMINATION (YDS) IN TURKEY AND ITS POSSIBLE WASHBACK EFFECTS. IOJET, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 4, 302–315. https://ajindex.com/articles/542463

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Aitken, K. G. (1977). Using cloze procedure as an overall language proficiency. TESOL Quarterly, 11(1), 59-67.
  2. Akın, G. (2016). Evaluation of national foreign language test in Turkey. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 4(3), 11-21.
  3. Akpinar, D. K. & Cakildere, B. (2013). Washback effects of high-stakes language tests of Turkey (KPDS and UDS) on productive and receptive skills of academic personnel. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 9(2), 81-94.
  4. Alderson, J. C. & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115-129.
  5. Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  6. Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996).
  7. Language testing in practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  8. Bagaric, V. & Djigunovic, J. M. (2007). Defining communicative competence. Metodika, 8(1), 94-103.
  9. Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education. Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in language programs. Upper saddle river, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. Cheng, L. & Curtis, A. (2004). Washback or backwash: a review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe, and A. Curtis (Eds.), Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods (p.3-17).
  10. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Güleç, B. A. (2013). Perceived attributions in foreign language assessment. International Journal of Language Academy, 1(1), 1-12.
  11. Hadley, A. O. (2001). Teaching language in context. Boston: Heinle. Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Kachru, B. B. (1992). World Englishes: approaches, issues and resources. Language Teaching, 25(1), 1-14.
  13. Kitao, S. K. & Kitao, K. (1996). Testing communicative competence. The Internet TESL Journal, 2(5), 1-6.
  14. Louma, S. (2004).
  15. Assessing speaking. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  16. Mirici, I. H. (2003). The factors affecting the success in English proficiency exams and possible contributions of the internet. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 4(1). Miyata, R. (2004). A review of TOEIC: A critical analysis of the structure, methods, and purpose of TOEIC, including its effect on teaching and learning English as a second or foreign language. Bulletin of Beppu University Juinor College, 23, 59-69.
  17. O'Malley, J. M. & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. New Yor