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 Alderson, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Hamp-Lyons, L.
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, 280-297 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/026553229601300304
© 1996 SAGE Publications

TOEFL preparation courses: a study of washback

J. Charles Alderson

Liz Hamp-Lyons

Lancaster University and Hong Kong Polytechnic University

'Washback' (sometimes also known as 'backwash') is the influence that writers on language testing, syllabus design and language teaching believe a test will have on the teaching that precedes it. Much has been written about the influence of testing on teaching. To date, however, little empirical evidence is available to support the assertions of either positive or negative washback.

The English proficiency test TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language: ETS) is among the best-known examinations in the field of ELT. The study reported in this article set out to investigate common claims that the TOEFL exerts an undesirable influence on language teaching. Our data consist of interviews with teachers and students, and observations made of two sorts of classes: 'normal' language proficiency classes, and parallel classes intended for students preparing to take the TOEFL. We observed both TOEFL preparation classes and non-TOEFL preparation classes by the same teachers in order to be able to separate washback from the TOEFL from any possible effect of individual teacher style.

This study leads us to suggest that simple forms of washback hypotheses are too naive: influences on what happens in class are much more complex than unexamined beliefs about washback allow. The results of the study suggest the need for more complex hypotheses about washback.


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
Simulation GamingHome page
M. R. Freiermuth
Symposium article: ESP needs washback and the fine tuning of driving instruction
Simulation Gaming, March 1, 2007; 38(1): 35 - 47.
[Abstract] [PDF]


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
T. Green
Book Review: Washback in language testing: research contexts and methods
Language Testing, October 1, 2005; 22(4): 539 - 545.
[PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
T. Eckes, M. Ellis, V. Kalnberzina, K. Pizorn, C. Springer, K. Szollas, and C. Tsagari
Progress and problems in reforming public language examinations in Europe: cameos from the Baltic States, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovenia, France and Germany
Language Testing, July 1, 2005; 22(3): 355 - 377.
[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. Cheng, T. Rogers, and H. Hu
ESL/EFL instructors' classroom assessment practices: purposes, methods, and procedures
Language Testing, July 1, 2004; 21(3): 360 - 389.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
C. A. Chapelle, J. Jamieson, and V. Hegelheimer
Validation of a web-based ESL test
Language Testing, October 1, 2003; 20(4): 409 - 439.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
J. Banerjee
The TOEFL CBT (Computer-based test)
Language Testing, January 1, 2003; 20(1): 111 - 123.
[PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
T. McNamara
Language assessment as social practice: challenges for research
Language Testing, October 1, 2001; 18(4): 333 - 349.
[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
B. K. Lynch
In search of the ethical test
Language Testing, November 1, 1997; 14(3): 315 - 327.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language TestingHome page
Y. Watanabe
Does grammar translation come from the entrance examination? Preliminary findings from classroom-based research
Language Testing, November 1, 1996; 13(3): 318 - 333.
[Abstract] [PDF]