1

Alexandria Mott
EDUC 553
15 October 2013
Test Evaluation
1. The instructions for each section are clear. They are one sentence directions or the
questions are self-explanatory. Basic language is used and there are no multiple-step
processes included, which all contribute to making the instructions clear.

2. All items in each section fir the instructions for that section. The only part that could be
potentially confusing for students are the couple questions in between the matching and
the fill in the blank sections. Although these questions are self-explanatory, the fact that
they are placed in the middle of the other two sections which each have their own set of
instructions could cause some troubles for students.
3. Most of the vocabulary used in the instructions and in the items is basic vocabulary.
Gunk is a word that I would not image most language learners would recognize
because of its informal nature. Also, there are a couple words like medium and
instrument that seem out of place with general terms like something or someone.
There are some difficult vocabulary words used in the word-bank but those words should
have been covered in class and not cause too many issues for the students.
4. The instructions do not indicate the approximate length of the desired response for the
open-ended sections. If I were to re-make this test, I would include the number of
sentences I would expect for each question. I would require 1-2 sentences for the nonmatching or fill in the blank questions and 2-3 sentences for the bonus question.
5. The instructions do not indicate the value of the particular section with respect to the
overall test score. If I were to re-make this test, I would include point values (probably 1
point per question) for each item.
6. The instrument is testing vocabulary skills in regards to sound and various facts about
how sound is produced. Matching, fill in the blank, and short answer questions are all
testing these skills.
7. The assessment is intended to assess some attainment of objectives versus to assess a
mastery set of objectives because the test cannot be retaken and therefore is only being
used to measure what students know at the time of assessment; it is not given repeatedly
until all students have mastered the objectives of the assessment. There is a goal score
of 80%, however that is not a required score to pass.

8. Sound Quiz is an appropriate name because all of the content on the assessment deals
with sound.
9. The content of the assessment is mostly fair for test takers with different backgrounds.
The question Something you say when you dont hear someone could potentially cause
issues because of different customs regarding manners when you do not hear somebody
or the variance in response depending on who is being spoken to.
10. There is no sensitive content or language used on the assessment.
11. The assessment instrument as a whole is fairly short. However, for the level of the
language learners, I think the length is sufficient.
12. No two items are assessing the same objective, therefore they cannot give away answers
to other items. However, in the fill in the blank section, there are two lines provided in
the answer space on the first item, making it very clear that the response has two words.
If I were providing this test, I would make sure that each item had only one line big
enough to support the correct response.
13. There are no true/false or multiple-choice responses that need to be randomized.
14. The technical arrangement of the items on the page is easy to follow. The distractors for
the matching section are all directly horizontal from the items and the word bank is
located on the same page as the fill in the blank questions.
15. The spacing between the items is accurate. However, if I were giving this assessment, I
would add an additional space between the distractors in the matching section that take
up more than one line to make all of the distractors for that section uniform.
16. The methods for scoring the instrument or grading a section have been adequately
determined. Multiple correct examples were listed for the short answer question that
could have a variety of responses and the rest of the items are very objective in nature.
17. If I were the teacher and had to admister this assessment instructument, I would make the
following changes/additions based on what I have learned about assessment:

I would eliminate the bonus question. If I felt like students needed to know the
information in that item I would make it worth points on the actual test and if I
did not feel like students needed to know the information in that item it would not
be necessary to include it on the test.
I would include the number of points each item is worth.
I would include how many sentences are necessary in the short answer responses.

I would include instructions for the short answer section between the end of the
matching section and the actual short answer questions.
I would eliminate the extra line on the first fill in the blank question to avoid
giving students an obvious response to an item.
I would implement a passing grade requirement, making the test become a
mastery of objectives versus an evaluative instrument for their level of
understanding at the time of evaluation. If I am giving a test to my students, I
want them to know, understand, and retain the information. If I do not allow them
the opportunity to do so, they will only fall further and further behind as the class
progresses.