AVIATION ENGLISH SERVICES （AES） Draft Detailed Outline

航空

游客，如果您要查看本帖隐藏内容请回复

航空

AES Draft Detailed Outline
1
AVIATION ENGLISH SERVICES
TEST INFORMATION HANDBOOK
VERSION 1-2006
AES Draft Detailed Outline
2
Executive Summary
BACKGROUND
1.1 Resolution A36-11 – Proficiency in the English language used for radiotelephony
communications directs the Council to support Contracting States in their implementation
of the language proficiency requirements by establishing globally harmonized language
testing criteria.
1.2 While the first version of Doc 9835 - Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language
Proficiency Requirements published in September 2004 provided some guidance on
testing, users of the manual including licensing authorities, air operators, air navigation
service providers, language training and testing services have indicated that more detailed
guidance on language testing was needed to effectively implement the language
proficiency requirements.
1.3 Language testing is a complex and sophisticated professional activity requiring expert input
at every stage: test development, implementation, administration, and scoring.
AES Draft Detailed Outline
3
SUMMARY REPORT
LANGUAGE TESTING FOR COMPLIANCE
with
ICAO LANGUAGE STANDARDS:
ISSUES AND CONSIDERATIONS
March 2006
PART A: Introduction......................................................................................................... 4
1 Statement of the Issue ................................................................................................. 4
2 Scope of the Report..................................................................................................... 4
3 Background: ICAO Standards in unregulated market ................................................ 4
4 The Context: Test Development Standards ................................................................ 4
Part B: Test Characteristics................................................................................................. 5
5 Test Purpose................................................................................................................ 5
• Diagnostic To identify strengths and weaknesses; assess gaps. ............................. 5
• Placement For placement into a tiered training program........................................ 5
• Progress To measure learning progress .................................................................. 5
• Achievement To measure overall learning ............................................................. 5
• Aptitude To assess ability to learn a new skill or knowledge set ........................... 5
• Proficiency To evaluate overall ability against a set of criteria.............................. 5
6 Test Characteristics..................................................................................................... 5
6.1 Language Focus .................................................................................................. 6
6.2 Delivery............................................................................................................... 6
6.3 Test tasks and Content ........................................................................................ 7
6.4 The Context II: ICAO Rating Scale and Holistic Descriptors............................ 7
7 Assessing tests: Documenting Fairness ...................................................................... 7
7.1 Validity ............................................................................................................... 8
7.2 Reliability............................................................................................................ 8
7.3 Practicality .......................................................................................................... 8
7.4 Test Washback.................................................................................................... 9
8 References................................................................................................................. 11
9 Appendix A: Checklist of Test Criteria .....................Error! Bookmark not defined.
10 Appendix B: ICAO Position Paper........................Error! Bookmark not defined.
AES Draft Detailed Outline
4
PART A: Introduction
1 Statement of the Issue
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has adopted strengthened language
proficiency requirements for flight crew and air traffic controllers operating along
international air routes. As a result of the new Standards and Recommended Practices
(SARPS), more stringent language testing requirements must be implemented by 2008, and
pilots and controllers must demonstrate proficiency at the ICAO Operational Level 4 in
order to maintain their license to operate internationally.
Organizations and individuals are seeking guidance on how to select, adapt, or develop
appropriate aviation-specific English language proficiency tests which will ensure
compliance with the ICAO Requirements.
2 Scope of the Report
This report will briefly summarize the main characteristics of appropriate aviation-English
tests and present the primary considerations in test selection and/or development.
Language testing is necessarily a rather complex issue, with professional expertise required
at the level of selection and/or implementation. However, for the sake of convenience and
ease, a very brief checklist for test evaluation is provided in Appendix A.
3 Background: ICAO Standards in unregulated market
In March 2003, the International Civil Aviation Organization adopted Standards and
Recommended Practices (SARPS) that strengthen language proficiency requirements for
pilots and air traffic controllers operating along international air routes. The new language
proficiency requirements clarify as a matter of an ICAO Standard that ICAO phraseologies
should be used where possible, and that if ICAO phraseologies are not applicable then plain
language proficiency is required. Codifying the use of plain language is a significant
departure from both previous ICAO requirements and from de-facto practice. The ICAO
language requirements establish minimum skill level requirements for language proficiency
for flight crew and air traffic controllers in the use of both phraseologies and plain language.
The minimum skill level requirements are embodied in the ICAO language proficiency
rating scale and the holistic descriptors.
The new ICAO language SARPS create a significant testing and training requirement,
particularly around the use of English. Reliable and valid aviation-specific English testing is
not yet widespread or widely available, although more testing programs are coming into the
market.
A complicating factor is that the language testing (and training) industry is both unregulated
and professionally complex. In the high-stakes environment of aviation English testing, the
lack of regulatory oversight is particularly problematic: the ICAO Standards and the 2008
compliance deadline create a market demand for testing services, but there is no regulatory
body to provide oversight to the test providers, nor guidance to consumers.
4 The Context: Test Development Standards
Language testing is a professional activity and is characterized by internally driven standards
for test development, trialing, implementation, rating and reporting. There are currently few
AES Draft Detailed Outline
5
organizations which provide test certification services, and no external industry requirements
that a test undergo certification.
However, a number of resources guide test development, including the International
Language Testing Association’s (ILTA) Code of Ethics (included in ICAO Document 9835,
Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements), the
Association of Language Testers in Europe (ALTE) Principles of Good Practice, among
others.
Part B: Test Characteristics
5 Test Purpose
There are a number of different purposes for administering a test. Test ‘purpose’
influences the test development process. Some common language test types, related
to test purpose, include the following, with brief descriptions:
• Diagnostic............ To identify strengths and weaknesses; assess gaps.
• Placement ........... For placement into a tiered training program
• Progress .............. To measure learning progress
• Achievement........ To measure overall learning
• Aptitude ............... To assess ability to learn a new skill or knowledge set
• Proficiency ......... To evaluate overall ability against a set of criteria
The ICAO Language Proficiency SARPS require proficiency testing. Proficiency
testing is different from progress or achievement tests in that proficiency tests do not
correspond directly to a learning curriculum. That is, it should not be possible to
directly prepare, or study, (by memorizing information, for example) for a
proficiency test. Proficiency tests require the test candidate to demonstrate their
ability to do something, rather than simply measure how much of a quantifiable set
of curriculum learning objectives
Proficiency testing is used to establish the competence of a candidate to exercise
language skills in operational conditions. A working definition of a proficiency test,
in our context, then, can be described as
• a set of structure events or procedures designed to elicit performances
• as samples of a candidate’s language skills in a standardized way,
• to enable reliable inferences to be made concerning his or her level of
competence,
• with the possibility of reproducing those skills at that level of competence
consistently over time. i
6 Test Characteristics
After determining the testing purpose, there are a number of test development
decisions which can be established, concerning focus, delivery, method, task, and
content.
AES Draft Detailed Outline
6
• Focus
􀂾 Speaking and Listening
􀂾 Reading or Writing
• Test Delivery Method
􀂾 Direct
􀂾 Semi-direct
• Test Task
􀂾 Interview/Discussion
􀂾 Role-play
􀂾 Simulation
􀂾 Questions/Answers
􀂾 Discrete point items
• Test Content
􀂾 Radiotelephony
􀂾 Plain aviation language
6.1 Language Focus
Language proficiency testing evaluates a candidates ability to use the language, to either
speak it, understand it, write it, or read it. In the case of the ICAO Standards, candidates are
required to demonstrate their speaking and listening proficiency.
6.2 Delivery
Speaking and listening proficiency can be assessed directly—through a direct interaction
between the candidate and the assessor—or through semi-direct testing, in which test
questions, or prompts, are pre-recorded and candidates record their responses individually,
via a simple recording or computer-assisted.
Research shows that both direct and semi-direct test methods produce reliable results.
However, the ICAO SARPS require the assessment of Interactions, which until now seems
to require live, direct candidate-to-tester interaction.
Outside of the issue of Interactions, each test delivery method has a unique set of advantages
and disadvantages.
Advantages Disadvantages
Direct • Ease of development
• Provides direct interactions
• Difficult to administer
Semi-direct • Easier to administer (able to administer
to large numbers simultaneously)
• More difficult to develop
AES Draft Detailed Outline
7
6.3 Test tasks and Content
There are any number of test tasks or prompt types which can be used to elicit speech
samples. In general, tasks which resemble real-life activities are most suitable. In the case of
aviation English testing, however, the ICAO SARPS require not only proficiency in the use
of the English (phraseology and plain language) used for radiotelephony communications,
but also plain (aviation-related) English. It is important that any test elicit a range of speech
sample, not limited to radiotelephony communication tasks.
6.4 The Context II: ICAO Rating Scale and Holistic Descriptors
Many features of language tests for the aviation industry are bound by constraints imposed
by the ICAO Rating Scale and Holistic Descriptors. ‘
A description of some of those is found in Appendix B, an ICAO informational paper related
to language testing. A summary of key points, related to test content is summarized here.
Radiotelephony communication involves the use of phraseologies and plain language. The
language proficiency requirements are applicable to the use of phraseology and plain
language. It is not the purpose of language proficiency tests to determine whether
phraseology has been used accurately within an operational context; this is assessed during
operational training and by operational examiners. Nevertheless, the holistic descriptors and
rating scale do apply to the use of phraseology as well as plain language. Therefore,
phraseology can be included in the range of stimulus in language proficiency tests, as long as
it is only aimed at assessing language proficiency of the test taker. For example, phraseology
can be used as a warm up or ice-breaking part of the test or as part of a script that will
require the test taker to use plain language.
The ICAO Position Paper on Language Testing (2005) makes clear that ‘tests should provide
candidate test-takers with sufficient and varied opportunities to use plain language in
aviation work-related contexts in order to demonstrate their ability with respect to each
descriptor in the Language Proficiency Rating Scale and the Holistic Descriptors”
(Attachment B).
A language proficiency test based only on phraseology is not considered valid because not
all holistic descriptors and components of the rating scale can be assessed such as
interactions, structure, vocabulary, etc.
7 Assessing tests: Documenting Fairness
The overriding concern of high-stakes test developers must be fairness. In language testing,
fairness is interpreted in terms of validity—that a test indeed tests what is it supposed to
test—and reliability—that the test gives consistent and fair results. Two other important
traits include practicality and test washback. All tests must be evaluated in terms of their
effect on test validity, test reliability, practicality, and washback effects.
AES Draft Detailed Outline
8
7.1 Validity
Validity is a fundamentally important test characteristic, and it, basically, involves providing
evidence to support the inferences that are made about an individual’s English language
proficiency based on their performance on a test. While validity can be thought of in overall
terms, testers frequently examine the validity of a test in a number of different types of
validity: such as content validity, construct validity, and concurrent or predictive validity.
Good testing practice requires, among other requirements, that a description of the validation
processes used in the test development process be published as part of the documents
relating to a test service (ALTE Principles of Good Practice.)
7.2 Reliability
Reliability refers to the stability of a test and test results; that is, evidence that the test can be
relied upon to produce consistent results across different test takers in similar situations.
There are a number of standard measures used in language test development to achieve this,
including comparing two halves of a test to one another, or to compare the results on the test
with the results by the same cohort of test-takers on another established test, among other
methods.
Rater Reliability
In speaking tests, an important aspect of reliability is rater reliability, and it is especially
important to ensure inter- and intra-rater reliability. This is accomplished through rater
reliability training and retraining, as well as sampling the ratings periodically to measure
against the results of mentor expert raters. Reliability measures, again, are ensured through
thorough test development, planning, and administration processes.
7.3 Practicality
Issues of test practicality impact test design in two ways: in terms of constraints imposed on
the development process by available resources (funding, time, talent) and the practical
aspects of implementing and administering the test into an established system.
Test Development
Every test development project will face a unique set of certain constraints on the process.
Issues like urgency, funding, resources, time, etc., necessarily impact the test development
process. The commitment to test fairness, and validity and reliability, must be balanced
against available resources and constraints.
A practical test is one that “does not place an unreasonable demand on available resources.”
(ALTE 2001) If the resources are not available to support the development of a test with
adequate attention to principles of good test design, then either (a) the test should be
modified, or (b) the test administrators must make the case for an increase in resources or
funding. When the latter option is not possible, then the test design should be modified to
match the available resources while maintaining the high standards for validity and
reliability evidence.
AES Draft Detailed Outline
9
The ALTE Principles of Good Practice (2001) best summarize in detail how the issue of test
practicality must be managed.
Test Administration
A test may be valid, fair, and reliable, but if it is not also practical, then it is not usable or
sustainable. The practicality of test administration must take into account particular national
or local constraints. A three or four hour aviation English test may be reliable and valid, but
it may not be practical in many instances.
7.4 Test Washback
A final consideration of test usefulness concerns the ‘washback’ effect on training; that is,
what effect on training ‘washes back’ from a test implementation?
Learners naturally want to be able to prepare for a test. If learners perceive that certain types
of learning or practice activities will prepare them for a test, they will direct their energies to
that, sometimes at the expense of activities which can actually help improve their language
proficiency.
An example can be found in the (older forms of the) TOEFL test. The TOEFL included a
large number of discrete-point (multiple choice, or error recognition) grammar questions, an
indirect test method, if your goal is proficiency testing. As a result, students often did not
perceive that communicative teaching methods would correlate to improved performance on
the TOEFL, and rather preferred to spend time practicing TOEFL-like test questions.
However, research showed that such activities did not correspond well to improve
proficiency levels, a case of negative test washback.
In the aviation arena, an example may be found in an aviation English test which focuses too
heavily on the use of phraseology or radiotelephony communications, at the exclusion of
plain aviation language. In that case, learners may constrain themselves to focusing on
memorizing more ICAO phraseology rather than on communicative language learning
activities which will actually improve their English language proficiency, albeit in an
aviation context.
8 Computer-assisted language testing
A final important aspect of modern test regards the use of computers in the development,
administration, and even rating of language proficiency tests. There are a number of ways
that computers can facilitate language testing.
Administration
Computers are very useful in the implementation and administration of language tests,
allowing for tests to better replicate the ‘real world’ through simulation and role-play, for
example. Additionally, computers permits larger-scale simultaneous administration of tests,
in some cases.
AES Draft Detailed Outline
10
9 Conclusions
It is recognized that high-stakes language testing is complex. The best recommendation for
organizations seeking to select, develop, or implement high-stakes aviation English language
testing is to seek the input and advice of language testing professionals. Such support may be
found within the Linguistic Departments of major universities. Additional direction is found
in the ICAO Guidance Manual, Document 9835, in Chapter 4, which provides a chart of
tester qualifications.
The Appendices to this Report provide more succinct review of the information necessary
for appropriate test evaluation.
Aviation English Services is pleased to have been able to provide support to the organization
and will be delighted to provide any other future assistance.
//end report
AES Draft Detailed Outline
11
10 References
ACTFL. www.actfl.org.
Alderson, J. C. Clapham, & D. Wall, (2001) ‘Language Test Construction and Evaluation’
Cambridge: CUP.
ALTE Principles of Good Practice for ALTE Examinations.
http://www.alte.org/quality_assurance/code/good_practice.pdf
An Overview of the ACTFL Proficiency Interviews. JALT Testing and Evaluation SIG
Newsletter. Vol 1. No. 2. Sep. 1997, (p. 3 – 9). www.jalt.org/test/yof_2.htm
Davidson, Fred, and Brian K. Lynch. Testcraft: A Teacher’s Guide to Writing and Using
Language Test Specifications. Yale University Press. 2002.
Douglas, Dan. Assessing Language for Specific Purposes. Cambridge UP. 2000.
ICAO Document 9835: Manual on the Implementation of the ICAO Language Proficiency
Requirements. 2001.
ICAO Position Paper: ICAO Policy on Language Proficiency Testing. (attached)
O’Loughlin, Kieran. Studies in Language Testing: The Equivalence of Direct and Semidirect
Speaking Tests. Cambridge UP. 2001.
i Mell, Jeremy. Paper presented at ICAO Regional Seminar on Aviation Language;
Buenos Aires, Argentina, September 2005.

xheleon

非常感谢楼主发布！！！！

Lee999

学习中，谢谢