Background and Goals - part 6

The test instructions were usually given in simple English with much demonstrating and gesturing to make sure that the instructions were really understood (see the instructions to test 1.2 as an example).

As concerns facets of the input, the input channels were either aural, to which the response was written/drawn, or visual, to which the response was aural. The presentation form was always nonlanguage. The vehicle of presentation was always 'live'. The language of presentation was normally English, although Hebrew was used where it was felt that the children did not understand what was being requested. This was especially the case in group games being played for the first time, such as tests 1.3 and 1.5. The problem was always identified, clearly focusing the test taker's attention on a specific amount of material. The tests were not speeded - it was unnecessary as the group progressed together, or if the test was individual, there was no pressure, just a conversational framework.

As concerns the format of the expected response, the type of the expected response was 'selected', as in the case of the pen and paper tests of aural comprehension. The type of response to the group games such as 1.3, 1.5, 2.3 and 2.6 are 'constructed' involving oral production although the response is highly structured. Tests 1.4 and 2.4 are constructed response of a less structured nature. The format of the expected response is nonlanguage in the case of the aural production tests 1.1, 1.2, 2.1 and 2.2. All tests of oral production use language in their response. The language of the expected response is always English.

The nature of the language input was sometimes in the mothertongue and sometimes in simple English using short sentences, vocabulary and much gesturing. The class teacher giving the test was aware of the children's capacity for understanding the language and adjusted the language accordingly.

The restrictions on the expected response were that in tests 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2 the response was written - either the drawing of an object, or the circling of the right picture corresponding to the vocabulary item spoken by the tester. In tests 1.3, 1.5, 2.3, 2.5, 2.6, the response was a highly defined sentence or word, and thus artificial. Tests 1.4 and 2.4 involved picture description on a one-to-one basis and thus had the potential for a more authentically communicative mode.

• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 1
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 2
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 3
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 4
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 5
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 6
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 7
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 8
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 9
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 10
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 11
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 12
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 13
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 14
• English for Children - Background and Goals - Part 15