Philosophy and Language Testing

Abstract

Conceptualizations Realism Realists hold to the Enlightenment view that the scientific method is the most productive in empirical research (whether quantitative or qualitative), as expressed by Popper (1959, p. 3): A scientist, whether theorist or experimenter, puts forward statements, or systems of statements, and tests them step by step. In the field of the empirical sciences, more particularly, he constructs hypotheses, or systems of theories, and tests them against experience by observation and experiment.

Validity theory: Reform policies, accountability testing, and consequences

“…It is commonly acknowledged that test score interpretation and use inevitably have consequences. Broadly, consequences refer to the effects of testing outcomes – intended and unintended, positive or negative – on different stakeholders, including students, teachers, administrators, as well as larger societal systems (Cheng, 2008; Fulcher, 2014; Hubley & Zumbo, 2011; Kunnan, 2004; Shohamy, 2001). Discussions of consequences focus on a number of highly contentious issues, which include whether the evaluation of consequences should be integral to validation; what aspects of consequences are to be investigated; and who is responsible for engaging in evaluating consequences and at what point.…”

“…Menken (2008) writes: “The acknowledgement in research of the intersection between testing and language policy is very recent; overall there is very little research on this critical topic” (p. 410). Additionally, the limited publications that engage in policy research tend to be either critical of policies/testing altogether (see discussion of realists and constructivists in Fulcher, 2014) or reactive whereby a policy initiative has unfolded and the related testing program is operational (Byrnes, 2005; Ravitch, 2010). Table 2 embeds the reactive policy approach in the last two sections: “Assessment Program & Arguments Under Development/Developed.” A reactive approach to investigations of consequences is important, but should not be the only mode of research engagement.…”

Context and Inference in Language Testing

“…Like atomism, interactional approaches to context are dualistic. Individuals are assumed to have abilities that are real in the sense that they have duration, and are independent of the thoughts or theories of the language testers (Fulcher, 2014b(Fulcher, , p. 1433. How language competence is realized in use is nevertheless influenced by the context of use.…”

“…The purely cognitive conception of language proficiency (and all human ability) is endemic to most branches of psychology, and psychometrics. This strong brand of realism assumes that variation in test scores is a direct causal effect of the variation of the trait within an individual (see the extensive discussion of validity theory in Fulcher, 2014b). This view of the world entails that any contextual feature that causes variation is a contaminant that pollutes the score.…”

Estudio comparativo de la prueba de redacción académica IELTS por escrito frente a la realizada en computadora en participantes de IELTS de inglés como lengua extranjera en la Universidad de Teherán

“…This knowledge includes a fixed proficiency construct that is present in participants in the assessment process. Based on this knowledge of language, each individual can be rated (Fulcher, 2014). The IELTS test sorts no functional or structural syllabus to model (Quaid, 2018), while it is assumed that the test takers' performance can be generalized to the real world.…”