Criterion vs. Norm-referenced Testing.
Saved in:
| Title: | Criterion vs. Norm-referenced Testing. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Pimsleur, Paul |
| Source: | Language Association Bulletin. Sep 1975 27(1):21-24. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 5 |
| Publication Date: | 1975 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles |
| Descriptors: | College Language Programs, Communicative Competence (Languages), Criterion Referenced Tests, Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Methods, Formative Evaluation, Language Instruction, Language Tests, Linguistic Performance, Norm Referenced Tests, Second Language Learning, Sociolinguistics, Summative Evaluation, Teaching Methods, Testing |
| Abstract: | A norm-referenced evaluation system, which evaluates the student in comparison to his peers, is rejected in favor of a criterion-referenced system. The latter, which rates the performance of a student on an absolute standard, makes for an individualized approach. Two kinds of tests are distinguished, the formative, administered during the course of learning, and the summative, which evaluates achievement following a given period of instruction. It is suggested that formative tests be of the criterion-referenced type. A specific testing program is outlined whereby an aptitude test is administered before instruction begins. When instruction begins, testing is tied directly to the teaching process. The advantage of this is knowing immediately which items need more work. Criterion-referenced testing also de-emphasizes competition, reduces anxiety about learning, and encourages teachers to set realistic and reachable goals, thus helping the less able students. Future language instruction should place greater emphasis on the teaching and testing of communicative competence. The results of an experiment conducted at the University of Illinois to determine the effectiveness of incorporating competence training into the learning process reinforce the importance of teaching communicative competence. A suggested foreign language testing program follows the article. (CLK) |
| Notes: | Not available in hard copy due to marginal legibility of original document |
| Journal Code: | RIEFEB1976 |
| Entry Date: | 1976 |
| Accession Number: | ED112681 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED112681 Name: ERIC Full Text Category: fullText Text: Full Text from ERIC |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: ED112681 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Criterion vs. Norm-referenced Testing. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pimsleur%2C+Paul%22">Pimsleur, Paul</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Language+Association+Bulletin%22"><i>Language Association Bulletin</i></searchLink>. Sep 1975 27(1):21-24. – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 5 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 1975 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Language+Programs%22">College Language Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communicative+Competence+%28Languages%29%22">Communicative Competence (Languages)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Criterion+Referenced+Tests%22">Criterion Referenced Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Criteria%22">Evaluation Criteria</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Formative+Evaluation%22">Formative Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Instruction%22">Language Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Tests%22">Language Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Linguistic+Performance%22">Linguistic Performance</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Norm+Referenced+Tests%22">Norm Referenced Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Second+Language+Learning%22">Second Language Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sociolinguistics%22">Sociolinguistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Summative+Evaluation%22">Summative Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Methods%22">Teaching Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Testing%22">Testing</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: A norm-referenced evaluation system, which evaluates the student in comparison to his peers, is rejected in favor of a criterion-referenced system. The latter, which rates the performance of a student on an absolute standard, makes for an individualized approach. Two kinds of tests are distinguished, the formative, administered during the course of learning, and the summative, which evaluates achievement following a given period of instruction. It is suggested that formative tests be of the criterion-referenced type. A specific testing program is outlined whereby an aptitude test is administered before instruction begins. When instruction begins, testing is tied directly to the teaching process. The advantage of this is knowing immediately which items need more work. Criterion-referenced testing also de-emphasizes competition, reduces anxiety about learning, and encourages teachers to set realistic and reachable goals, thus helping the less able students. Future language instruction should place greater emphasis on the teaching and testing of communicative competence. The results of an experiment conducted at the University of Illinois to determine the effectiveness of incorporating competence training into the learning process reinforce the importance of teaching communicative competence. A suggested foreign language testing program follows the article. (CLK) – Name: Note Label: Notes Group: Note Data: Not available in hard copy due to marginal legibility of original document – Name: CodeSource Label: Journal Code Group: SrcInfo Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JC" term="%22RIEFEB1976%22">RIEFEB1976</searchLink> – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 1976 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: ED112681 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED112681 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 5 StartPage: 21 Subjects: – SubjectFull: College Language Programs Type: general – SubjectFull: Communicative Competence (Languages) Type: general – SubjectFull: Criterion Referenced Tests Type: general – SubjectFull: Evaluation Criteria Type: general – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods Type: general – SubjectFull: Formative Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Language Instruction Type: general – SubjectFull: Language Tests Type: general – SubjectFull: Linguistic Performance Type: general – SubjectFull: Norm Referenced Tests Type: general – SubjectFull: Second Language Learning Type: general – SubjectFull: Sociolinguistics Type: general – SubjectFull: Summative Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Teaching Methods Type: general – SubjectFull: Testing Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Criterion vs. Norm-referenced Testing. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Pimsleur, Paul IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 09 Type: published Y: 1975 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 27 – Type: issue Value: 1 Titles: – TitleFull: Language Association Bulletin Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
