Testing anxiety: a perspective

Since a lot of us talked about testing anxiety in our blogs but don't have a lot of experience with this ourselves, I decided to ask a friend of mine about her experience with testing anxiety.  She is my age and very successful academically and professionally.  She's currently holding down a job in her field of study and will finish her master's degree in the spring.  Although it wasn't her main focus, she did study Spanish during undergrad and studied abroad.  I asked her how testing anxiety affects her and what she does to mitigate those effects.  Her answer is copied and pasted here:

"For me confidence definitely plays a huge part in anxiety with tests. I don't think I necessarily get more things wrong, it doesn't necessarily affect my accuracy in responding. When it builds up, what's most affected is my ability to focus. I just either flip through the test a million and a half times or stare off or get up and leave. I just get super overwhelmed and shut down.

The two biggest things I've learned is really planning out how I will use my time during the test and when I start preparing for a big test. When I'm good (which is rare) I will start to study for exams about two weeks before daily. That way I can tell myself that I absolutely know the material and self doubt doesn't become a big issue during the test. Also, when we first get the test I go through and decide when I should get to certain parts or I do the biggest part first and give myself a time limit (If there are multiple choice and two essays and the exam is two hours long I may do the essays first and tell myself I should complete them in the first 45 minutes.) Learning to time manage during the test is the most important. Breaking it into sections and thinking about that amount of time rather than the test as a whole makes it considerably less overwhelming. "

I asked her when she figured out those strategies for herself and she said,

"I think I actually didn't really figure any of it out until I started taking education classes. So probably college. Through high school I had a lot of teachers who learned to check in with me during tests and remind me of where I should be but that never taught me to self monitor. I definitely wish somebody had taught me how to do it myself earlier."

Obviously it's different for every person, but I never though of self-doubt being what causes people to be unable to focus.  Psychologically it's smart to eliminate that problem by starting to study way ahead of time, but I understand all too well how hard it can be to do stuff that far ahead.  I also liked her emphasis on time management as a test taking strategy, which also happens to be a skill that every single test taker, anxious or not, needs to employ to successfully complete an intensive test.

Foreign Language Assessment

How accurately do you feel that classroom-based tests reflect student abilities? What are your experiences as a test-taker? Do you think there are students that do not test well? What method of testing do you think is most effective to measure students' language skills? Use examples to justify your point of view.

As an intern at Exeter High School, I have handed out, corrected, and handed back close to 12 in total throughout the semester. As I correct the exams, I often find myself thinking about these discussion questions. Did this test accurately reflect my students' abilities? I often find that students who do not do well in class are the students that do not perform well on the exam, and students who participate and make connections in class do well. As high schoolers, I think this has a lot more to do with their study habits, attention span, and interest in the material than it does with the test. I had a couple of students come into class one day and say that they didn't like my class because "they had to try". I do agree, and have first-hand experience that foreign language comes more easily to some than it does to others, but even those that understand it need to put in effort. When students do not perform well on an exam, I go back over the parts that they got wrong and I constantly ask myself if I covered that section enough? Was I clear enough in my presentation? Was the question confusing? Every time I found the question to be clear and the material to be covered well. Therefore, when students do not do well on an exam, I think it has more to do with their study habits than the quality of the question.

With that being said, I do not think that written tests are always a great indication of the knowledge that our students have. I do believe that there are some students who are genuinely poor test-takers, and let anxiety and stress interfere with their ability to portray their knowledge of the subject. I find that this is more likely when the subject doesn't come easily to students. When I was a student, I would study for a French test, go into the exam with little stress and do well. However, the story was completely different when it came to calculus or chemistry. I could study for hours on end and I would go into the test shaking with nerves, and get a mediocre grade. The grade didn't always reflect that I didn't know an aspect of the subject; when I was anxious or stressed I would have a much harder time recalling the information, which I think happens to some students. 

With foreign language, I think that there are a variety of tools and methods to test students' ability. I remember when I was in high school, my teacher had a test with four separate parts on it: a listening, a speaking, a reading, and a writing component. I think that if a written test is the preferred method then these are the four areas that need to be tested. However, technology has added more ways of testing students. Exeter high school has a wonderful language lab where students have headphones with attached microphones, and students can record a conversation, or answers to a question. This is a great tool because the teacher can assess pronunciation, without having to take time out of class to do so. Presentations can also be a form of summative assessment. My ED500 experience was at Noble high school and the teacher was wrapping up a unit on restaurants and food, and the exam was a café experience in class that the students had to act out. They had table cloths, plastic silverware and menus, and they had to display their knowledge of the roles of waiter and customer through acting it out. I think that when it comes to assessing students, variety is a good thing because if the same teacher uses tests out of the book all of the time, the students come to expect it.

Testing

I believe classroom-based tests are usually pretty good indicators of how a student is performing in a class. They are better for testing particular knowledge or skills that a lesson or a course is aimed at teaching though than they are for testing overall proficiency. So for example, a test would be good for seeing if a student learned particular rules of grammar in a foreign language class, but probably not as good for testing how well they are able to employ those grammar rules in their speech and writing on a consistent basis.

I believe I am a good test taker and know all of the good strategies and thought processes for taking a good exam. For many students, I do think there are many factors that can affect test scores more than just how well a student knows the material. Some possible influences are nerves, lack of test-taking strategies, and weird questions like those that are worded badly or are ‘gotcha’ questions. Still, I think a well formed exam will elicit responses that indicate whether a student knows what they need to know or not. So to me, being a bad test-taker is not a very good excuse, but maybe someone will make me change my mind on that!

Testing language skills can be done in a ton of ways. It’s not like a math class where it is hard to deviate from just one way of testing. I think it’s important for a teacher to know what they want to test when making an assessment. If you only want to assess if the students know how to conjugate particular verbs, make sure other parts of the conjugation test, like reading comprehension, are not going to be what messes them up. The test should be simple enough that if a student gets something wrong, you know that it’s only because they do not know the conjugation, and not because of some other aspect of the question. It’s okay to test overall comprehension, proficiency, or another skill as well in other assessments, or other parts of this one, but not where you want to know their conjugation skills/memorization.

I think when testing overall proficiency, it may be better to test on one of the four core (reading, writing, listening, speaking) at a time. If you want to test their writing abilities, make sure you have set up the exam so that it will not be their lack of reading comprehension abilities to perform well on the writing part. This is just like what I was saying above with the conjugations.

Finally, I think quizzes and tests, even in the language classroom, are best, especially for summative assessments. They are efficient, careful, and direct. However, I am not at all opposed to using projects, presentations, etc. every so often too.

Formative assessments is a whole other category that I did not really talk about here, but you can do this in a ton of different ways. Formative assessments can be much more diverse and creative. And they can tell you what you need to teach better efficiently and before it is too late.

Assessment in the foreign language classroom

Assessment is, in my opinion an effective method of ensuring students' learning in the classroom. However, the effective teacher will vary their assessments to meet the needs of the diverse group of students. It is very important that the test focus on authentic material, as should all components of a foreign language class. That being said there are usually specific objectives in each unit or chapter of a given textbook that must be tested.  The teacher needs to assess all students in the most equitable ways possible There are many creative ways to test even the required components. An example may be the use of interactive skits as a way of assessing students oral abilities.
I feel it is very important to have a variety of methods for a teacher to test a student's learning abilities. I have always been very successful in my foreign-language classes but I'm most successful in my oral assessments.
I certainly think that there are most definitely students that don't test as well as others. Some students have testing anxiety  and may know the material inside and out but when it comes to to testing they mayfreeze and not be able to remember a thing.
I think the most effective test would test all four skills while certainly including a cultural component. In terms of format, the test will include at least multiple-choice, matching and filling in the blank and short answer. Each of these would have it's own section on the test. Listening is also a critical component to test. In terms of the most effective method to ensure students are successful, I would probably use either multiple-choice or true false. I would also allow the students to respond in English since I am not testing their ability to write but more importantly I want to test comprehension.

Testing in the Foreign Language Classroom

I am writing this blog post after having spent close to four hours grading my Spanish 401 class’ most recent exams, and so the issue of testing in the foreign language classroom is fresh on my mind. As was previously mentioned, my students’ exams really do not tell me anything new, as I, having known them now for almost a semester, had a fairly good idea of how they would perform. Those who clearly come to class prepared earn high grades, while those who seemingly put little effort into the course struggle on the exams. In many cases, I think that my exam grades, more than anything, tell me how mature my students are and how well they navigate life as a college student. I have several students who seriously struggle as language learners, and yet earn A’s and B’s on the exams due to their perseverance, hard work outside of the classroom, and commitment to seeking out extra help when need be. On the other hand, I also have students who I know (due to their performance in class) do not struggle with memorizing vocabulary or comprehending grammatical structures but who do not study, as well as students who do struggle but never seek out extra help despite my constant urging.

I’ve come to the conclusion that doing well on our Spanish 401 exams has much less to do with being a good language learner than it does with putting in the time and effort that is necessary to succeed on such an assessment. My “A” students are not necessarily smarter or better language learners that my “D” students; they simply have a better grasp of what it takes to earn high grades on this type of assessment. In some cases, those who have a very natural ability to learn languages will obviously have an advantage over those who do not, but, in my opinion, everything comes down to how well a student prepares for and acquaints him or herself with the given exam format. When studying for the exam students are not necessarily honing their language abilities, but rather are attempting to prepare themselves to answer the questions asked by the exam, and many of such questions are seemingly unrelated to “authentic” or realistic uses of the language. Testing, therefore, asks students to regurgitate information in order to asses how well they have absorbed such material.

Although I am often frustrated by our exam’s ability to test real language competencies, I struggle to think of a better way to assess our students given the fast pace of Spanish 401 and relative lack of time in the semester for more creative types of assessments. I like that our exams force students to be accountable for the material that we have covered, but at the same time I very much dislike the idea that students are simply memorizing material for a test. I wonder how much my students are truly retaining, and whether or not the material is actually meaningful to them. Will they actually remember any of what they have learned once the 401-402 sequence is over, or did they only learn parts of the language temporarily in order to boost their GPA? I also obviously worry that such assessments create far too much anxiety and therefore discourage students who are already struggling in the class. Students who are seasoned test-takers and who are accustomed to life as a college student know exactly how to prepare and what to expect, while those who have testing anxiety, are not “good” test-takers, or who are new to UNH seem to become quite nervous upon being given an exam and therefore hinder their own ability to show what they know. I guess, more than anything, I am unsure if a solution exists that responds to all of my concerns but that also fits well within the time constraints of the Spanish 401 classroom. Any ideas?      

Response to Discussion #7: Foreign Language Assessment

I think that classroom-based tests accurately reflect students’ abilities, but only in certain areas.  Tests usually only evaluate one way of thinking – if it’s a well-made test, maybe it requires you to think a handful of different ways – and that’s a fairly narrow way to measure the various ways different people’s brains work.  I think testing does have its place in the foreign language classroom because it does evaluate basic understanding of vocabulary and grammar, and frankly, if you can’t reproduce those things on an exam, then there is probably a breakdown of your understanding of them.  I also think it’s important for students to occasionally be expected to produce language on their own without any notes or book to help them.  However, tests should not make up a huge part of the grade, especially in beginning levels – maybe 30% at the most. 

I think proficiency-oriented tests do the best job of measuring arguably the most important ability in language, which is the ability to understand and communicate.  Instead of testing only your understanding of direct object pronouns, for instance, they test how well you can apply the language as a whole, and that’s really the area foreign language education aims to develop.  However, proficiency testing does not measure how well someone is absorbing specific course content.  Of course, gaining and evaluating specific content is also of value because individual skills are what ultimately improve proficiency.  As a compromise, such achievement-oriented tests to measure content absorbed in the classroom should utilize different types of questions to allow for different ways of thinking about the concept.  As many questions as possible should require meaningful processing, meaning that student needs to be able to understand the context in order to answer the question.  This requires them to apply more skills on each question and represents a somewhat closer, but in no way exact, approximation of their proficiency level.

I am fortunate as a test taker.  I get just enough anxiety to get me to study but not so much that it negatively affects my performance.  As a seasoned student (as we are all in this class) I am used to the way exams are formatted and usually have some idea ahead of time about how best to study.  Of course, just a little guidance from the instructor about how to study goes a long way, and in turn I make an effort to help my students structure their studying for Spanish exams, especially with the use of study guides. 

This has been touched on in previous posts, but I will explicitly ask here, do you accept the idea that there are people that “don’t test well”?  I especially remember this being discussed when I took the SATs in high school and some of my friends who did well in school struggled to raise their scores to where they wanted them to be.  If you can’t reproduce information on an exam, what does that say about your understanding?  I do not mean to imply that it means you don’t understand – it could just be that you understand it when you think about the same material in a different way than the test frames the question.  I understand that many people’s anxiety gets in the way of their performance, and later they see the exam and wonder why they did what they did, when they know they know better.  I guess I have mixed feelings - in some ways I understand that some people “don’t test well,” but in other ways I think that the ability to reproduce certain information does represent the level of understanding.  What do you think?

Testing in the Language Classroom

How to test students is always going to be a tough question. Students have various strengths and weaknesses that will affect which testing method is the best for them. On top of that some students just are not good testers in general. I know several people that were good at class work, and knew the material, but could not do well on the tests. 

That being said, testing is necessary to see how students are doing. Otherwise we would never know that the quiet student sitting in the back is in fact one of the best students in the class. Testing can be used to adjust the curriculum to review tricky sections, and either slow down or pick up the speed. Obviously if a whole class does badly on a test or quiz there needs to be more work on the section. 

As for my own experiences, I was a pretty good tester in high school, so I did pretty well. I think my teachers used pretty standard testing formats. Lots of vocabulary tests as beginners, and eventually we built up to writing short essays. We also ended up practicing listening and speaking more as we advanced. I feel like we should have done more with these from the beginning though. I feel like it would have helped me a lot in the long run despite how much everyone hated speaking and listening tests. 

The problem with speaking tests is that they have to either be graded on the spot, which can be difficult, or recorded. Grading recorded tests takes a lot of time, especially if you want to transcribe them so that students can see their errors. Obviously it is important to do this, but finding the best way can take awhile for the novice teacher. 

As for listening tests, I guess you just have to try to take the stress out of it. Of course that is easier said than done. I know what some teachers do for lower level students is do read the listening part themselves, so they can control the speed and the students are used to their voice. You could argue that this is too easy, or that it is a building block up to more authentic sounding material. I personally like this method for novice students with general topics like time or the weather. 

My last point is that I do not think that tests should be a huge part of the grade. They are important but students need to also be evaluated through other means, including projects and regular day to day work. I also believe that effort should be a section of the grade since languages are not for everyone and some people struggle a lot in language classes. 

Effectiveness of Assessment

How accurately do you feel that classroom-based tests reflect student abilities? What are your experiences as a test-taker? Do you think there are students that do not test well? What method of testing do you think is most effective to measure students' language skills? Use examples to justify your point of view.

In my view, classroom testing only provides limited insight into a student's language abilities. From my admittedly limited teaching experience, I found that for the most part classroom testing seemed only to confirm what I already knew about my students. The students that were performing well in class did well on tests and vise versa with very few exceptions to that rule. I think this is especially true in lower level language courses, were tests also happen to occur more frequently as a measure of student skills. More often than not, I think classroom tests are used as a way of forcing students to demonstrate their abilities and knowledge in a high pressure situation. I think this is interesting given the amount of time we have devoted in class discussing how important a low anxiety environment is to facilitate successful language learning.

This is not to say that testing is entirely useless. I have given both short quizzes and large chapter tests in the classes I have taught and they were useful to me as a teacher because they provided me with a good way to know whether the class was understanding certain concepts and learning goals. A quiz especially gives a teacher a good benchmark to work from and allows him/her to adjust lesson plan accordingly, depending on the needs of the class. Larger tests can make a teacher aware of student needs as well, but since they usually come at the end of a chapter or unit, it can be difficult to backpedal and incorporate further practice while at the same time moving the class forward and on to more advanced concepts. 

End of unit or end of course projects can be an interesting alternative to traditional tests to measure language skills. A project tied to an oral and written component can serve well to measure a student's language skill when the teacher is clear about expectations. Since it is difficult to create "authentic" speaking activities in the context of a text, I see student projects/presentations in lieu of testing to be a good alternative. It provides a more authentic and meaningful context to measure the student's speaking skills. Ideally, my language classes would have a mixture of student projects/presentations and traditional tests. This approach would also cater to student needs and learning styles. Not every student, including myself, are good test takers and a teacher should provide ways for students to demonstrate their skills beyond a traditional test.

#7: Effectiveness of Assessment

How accurately do you feel that classroom-based tests reflect student abilities? What are your experiences as a test-taker? Do you think there are students that do not test well? What method of testing do you think is most effective to measure students' language skills? Use examples to justify your point of view.

I feel that all in all, tests do a reasonably good job in reflecting student's abilities, so long as they test all four skills, as well as the different elements of communicative competence, and not just reading and writing.  It is very important to include listening and speaking, as well as a cultural component into tests in oder to have a well rounded assessment of a student's abilities.  Our textbook provides examples of the "Hybrid Approach" to classroom testing, which I believe does a serviceable job combining these different elements and placing them into a "naturalized" context.  The test should mirror the format of classwork;  this provides another layer of schema for students because they are already familiar with the expectations and format of the test.

The same principles hold true for testing as they stand for teaching; the testing and development of FL skills require multiple smaller skills (the different competencies) and an authentic context.  The further that tests deviate from these principles, the less accurately they reflect student's abilities.  

Luckily, I am a good test taker;  I have never had a hard time taking exams regardless of their format, but I do believe that there are some students whose test scores do not accurately reflect their skills.  I think that for the most part, anxiety is the biggest factor in these student's test performances.  A student who allows the permanence of a test (the idea of a grade!) scare them into over-thinking and anxiety will have test scores that are probably much less proficient than their assignments (where they have more time and resources at their disposal) or in classwork, when it is unlikely that they are being graded.  

In my experience, the most important factor in my success in a test has been whether or not the expectations of the test were clearly defined by the instructor.  Above all, students need to know what to study, and how to study it in order to be successful.  This means that teachers must clearly define what subjects will be on the test, and in what format.  It is nearly impossible for a student to study all of the material—teachers can tell students what is the most important to know.  For example: "The test will cover everything you have learned up to now," or "Study chapters 5 and 6," are not sufficiently defined expectations for a test.  A better way to inform students would be "Please review the conjugations of all of the irregular verbs from chapter 6, there will be phrases to translate, also: reread the culture section, there will be related listening activities with true or false questions."  

Discussion #7: Foreign Language Assessment

How accurately do you feel that classroom-based tests reflect student abilities? What are your experiences as a test-taker? Do you think there are students that do not test well? What method of testing do you think is most effective to measure students' language skills? Use examples to justify your point of view.