Language Testing

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bailey, K. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Language Testing, Vol. 13, No. 3, 257-279 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/026553229601300303
© 1996 SAGE Publications

Reviews

Working for washback: a review of the washback concept in language testing

Kathleen M. Bailey

This article is a literature review which seeks to answer four questions: 1) What is washback? 2) How does washback work? 3) How can we promote positive washback? 4) How can we investigate washback? Building on the 'Washback Hypothesis' proposed by Alderson and Wall, and suggestions from Hughes, the article proposes a model that identifies participants, processes and products which may influence, or be influenced by, washback. Strategies for investigating wash back are also discussed.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Language TestingHome page
A. Huhta, P. Kalaja, and A. Pitkanen-Huhta
Discursive construction of a high-stakes test: the many faces of a test-taker
Language Testing, July 1, 2006; 23(3): 326 - 350.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
S. Saif
Aiming for positive washback: a case study of international teaching assistants
Language Testing, January 1, 2006; 23(1): 1 - 34.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
H. V. Dastjerdi and M. R. Talebinezhad
Chain-preserving deletion procedure in cloze: a discoursal perspective
Language Testing, January 1, 2006; 23(1): 58 - 72.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
Q. Luxia
Stakeholders' conflicting aims undermine the washback function of a high-stakes test
Language Testing, April 1, 2005; 22(2): 142 - 173.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language Teaching ResearchHome page
M. Spratt
Washback and the classroom: the implications for teaching and learning of studies of washback from exams
Language Teaching Research, January 1, 2005; 9(1): 5 - 29.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
L. F. Bachman
Modern language testing at the turn of the century: assuring that what we count counts
Language Testing, January 1, 2000; 17(1): 1 - 42.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
L. Hamp-Lyons
Washback, impact and validity: ethical concerns
Language Testing, November 1, 1997; 14(3): 295 - 303.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Language TestingHome page
D. Wall
Introducing new tests into traditional systems: insights from general education and from innovation theory
Language Testing, November 1, 1996; 13(3): 334 - 354.
[Abstract] [PDF]