Untravelledworld7@gmail.com

1. The Components of Test Specifications

4. What is the Test component of specification?
• The test component of specifications is a written document that provides
essential background information about the planned exam program. This
information is then used to focus and guide the remaining steps in the test
development process.
• Specifications are generative and explanatory in nature. A key benefit of
using test specifications is their efficiency. (Alderson, et al., 1995:2).

5. What are Specs?
• Test specifications – usually called ‘specs’ – are generative explanatory
documents for the creation of test tasks.
specs have the role of a generative blue print, from which many equivalent
test items or tasks can be produced.
Specs tell us the rationale behind the various choices that we make.
Specs tell us the nuts and bolts of how to phrase the test items.
(Davidson & Lynch, 2002)

6. McNamara, (2000:31), defines it as ‘a set of instructions for creating the
test’ and its purpose is to ‘make explicit the design decisions in the test and
to allow new versions to be written in the future by someone other than the
test developer’.

7. What is specs goal in a test?
The ultimate goal of a specs review is to
build a stronger validity argument by
identifying issues that might undermine
the validity.

8. Brown (1994:387) simply calls it ‘practical outline of your test’;
Brown’s questions, when borne in mind, would aid in writing
good test specifications:
Are the directions to each section absolutely clear?
Does each item measure a specific item?
Is each item stated in clear, simple language?
Does the difficulty of each item seem to be appropriate for the students?
Does the sum of the items and test as whole adequately reflect the learning
objectives?

9. Ruch (1929) view point about Test specifications:
He may have been the earliest proponent of test specifications in
educational and psychological assessment.
He mentioned detailed rules of procedures for TS.
He recognized the need for specifications to be immediately relevant to the
local context and test.
He believed that such general statements would probably be impossible.

10. Hughes, Bachman and Palmer view about test specifications:
Hughes(2003), was an early advocate for increased level of details.
According to him it is not to be expected that everything in the specification
will always appear in the test;
Bachman and Palmer (1996) and Alderson(1995), called for more details
to be included in test specifications, although Bachman and Palmer were
more detailed than Alderson.

11. Davidson and Lynch’s iterative-based model of Test specifications:
•According to Davidson and Lynch (2002:20), there is no single best format for test
specifications; ‘the principles are universal’. Their specification model calls for test
developers to include a
(GD) general description
(PA) prompt attributes
(RA) response attributes
(SI) sample items and (SS) specification supplement ,if necessary.

12. Justification for the Test Specifications
Cornerstones: Most commentators consider validity and
reliability to be the most important criteria in judging a
test’s quality, but there are so many factors into
consideration in having a good test that call them
‘cornerstones’ of testing, although Bachman and Palmer
caution that it is an impossible task.( Bachman and
Palmer, 1996)

13. Test Specifications Cornerstones:
Validity : The term validity refers to the extent to which a test measures what it says it
measures (Heaton 1988:159).
Reliability: Reliability is concerned with ensuring consistency of test scores.
Practicality: Practical issues include time, resources and administrative logistics; and it
is, perhaps, one of the most important qualities of a test.
Washback : According to Buck (1988), Washback refers to the effect of testing on
teaching and learning.

14. Authenticity: It is an important criterion to judge a test’s quality; and good testing, should
strive to use formats and tests that mirror the types of situations in which students would
authentically use the target language.
 Transparency: Transparency refers to the availability of clear, accurate information to
students about testing.
Scorer reliability: It means clearly defining the weighing for each section, describing
specific criteria for marking and grading. (Weir, 1993, p.7)

15. Criteria for Assessment:
It depends and will be checked whether the
response is relevant to the assigned topic or
not, what level of thoroughness it presents.

16. Rating Scales:
Scoring is often taken for granted in language test that the writer, does not
intend to do. Scoring will be:
Analytical: A type of rating scale that requires teachers to allot separate
ratings for the different components of language ability.
Holistic: one based on an impressionistic method of scoring. (Davies 1990)

17. The components of test specifications for teaching skills:
1. Listening

18. 2. Speaking:

19. 3. Reading:

20. 4. Writing:

21. Conclusion:

22. References:
Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C. and Wall, D. (1995). Language Test Construction and Evaluation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996/2010). Language testing in practice. Oxford:Oxford University
Press.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents. pp. 373 – 392

23. Brown JD and Bailey KM (2008). Language testing courses: What are they in 2007? Language
Testing, 25(3): 349–383.
Brindley, G. (2001). Assessment. In Carter and Nunan (Eds.). The Cambridge Guide to TESOL.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.137-143.
Carroll, B .J. (1980). Testing Communicative Performance. Oxford: Pergamon.
Davies, A. (1990). Principles of language testing. Oxford: Blackwell.
Davidson F and Lynch BK (2002). Testcraft: A teacher’s guide to writing and using language test specifications.
New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

24. Douglas, D. (2004). Discourse domains: the cognitive context of speaking. In Boxer, D.,&
Cohen, A. (Eds.), Studying speaking to inform second language learning (pp. 25-47). Clevedon, England:
Multilingual Matters.
Fulcher, G. & Davidson, F. (2007) Language Testing and Assessment: An Advanced Resource Book. Oxford: Routledge.
Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
McNamara, T. (2000). Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In Linn, R. L. (Ed.). Educational Measurement. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press, 13-103.
Ruch, G. M. (1929). The objective or new-type examination: An introduction to educational measurement. Chicago:
Scott, Foresman.

25. Cr by: Zahra Bayani