Topic Variable in Narrow-Scope Eap Short-Context Reading Tests

Abstract

The present study was an attempt to explore (a) the extent to which EAP students' reading performance on a discipline-specific short- context reading test is influenced by their knowledge of subject-matter of the test tasks, (b) the impact(s) that narrow-scope discipline-specific test tasks may have on the psychometric characteristics of the test, and (c) the suitability of short-context method of testing reading comprehension in an EAP context. To this end, two 20-item multiple- choice short-context reading tests comprising 20 items on statistics and 20 items on discipline-neutral topics were developed and administered to 53 Iranian college-level students of (1) statistics, (2) chemistry, and (3) history. Results demonstrated that students of statistics significantly outperformed students of history and chemistry. Furthermore, topic specificity of the test tasks did not seem to improve the psychometric properties of the discipline-related test. And short- context testing appeared to function equally well in an EAP context.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alderson, J. C. and C. Clapham (eds). 1993. Examining the ELTS test: An account of the first stage of the ELTS revision project. London & Canberra: University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate and International Development Program .

Alderson, J.C. and A.H. Urquhart. 1983. Effect of student background discipline on comprehension: A pilot study. In Hughes, A. and D. Porter (eds). Current developments in language testing. London: Academic Press.

Alderson, J.C. and A.H. Urquhart. 1985. The effect of students' academic discipline on their performance on ESP reading tests. Language Testing 2: 192-204.

Alderson, J.C. and A.H. Urquhart. 1988. This test is unfair: I'm not an economist . In Carrell, P. L. , J. Devine and D. E. Eskey (eds). Interactive approaches to second language reading . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bachman, L.F. 1990. Fundamental considerations in language testing . Oxford: Oxford University Press .

Bachman, L.F. , and A.S. Palmer. 1983. Oral interview test of communicative proficiency in English. Urbana, ILL.: Photo-offset.

Bachman, L.F. , and A.S. Palmer. 1996. Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carrell, P. 1984. Evidence of a formal schemata in second language comprehension . Language Learning 34: 87-112.

Carrell, P.L. 1985. Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure . TESOL Quarterly 19: 727-752.

10.

Clapham, C. 1993. Is ESP testing justified? In Douglas,D. and C. Chapelle (eds). A new decade of language testing research. Virginia: TESOL Inc.

11.

Corrigan , et al. 1978. English placement tests, Form A, B, and C. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.

12.

Davy, E. ,and K. Davy. 1984. TOEFL reading comprehension and vocabulary workbook . New York: Prentice Hall Press .

13.

Erickson, M. , and J. Molloy. 1983. ESP test development for engineering students. In Oller, J. W. (ed). Issues in language testing research. USA, Rowley : Newbury House Publishers, Inc.

14.

Hale, G. 1988. Student major field and text content: Interaction effects on reading comprehension in the Test of English as a Foreign Language . Language Testing 5: 49-61.

15.

Hoetker, J. 1982. Essay examination topics and students' writing . College Composition and Communication 33: 337-392.

16.

Howell, D.C. 1989. Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). USA, Boston: PWS-KENT Publishing Co.

17.

Jafarpur, A. 1987. The short-context technique: An alternative for testing reading comprehension. Language Testing 4/2:195-212.

18.

Jennings, M. , J. Fox and B. Graves. 1999. The test-takers' choice: An investigation of the effect of topic on language-test performance. Language Testing 16/4: 426-456.

19.

Koh, M. 1985. The role of prior knowledge in reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language 3: 375-380.

20.

Messick, S. 1989. Validity. In Linn, R.L. (ed). Educational measurement. New York : American Council on Education/Macmillan .

21.

Messick, S. 1996. Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing 13: 241-256.

22.

Tan, S. 1990. The role of prior knowledge and language proficiency as predictors of reading comprehension among undergraduates. In De Jong, J. , and D. Stevenson (eds). Individualizing the assessment of language abilities , Clevedon and Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.

23.

Weir, C. 1983. Identifying the language problems of overseas students in tertiary education in the UK. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of London.