If you haven't come across this term before, it refers to the phenomenon of assessment style affecting teaching methodology. For example, if you include translation into the target language in an examination, teachers will inevitably incorporate plenty of practice in the skill of translating into the target language. Another common example would be testing comprehension by using questions in English. If you include this style of assessment in examinations, teachers will practise it and course books will include it.
Unfortunately the backwash effect can have a damaging influence on methodology. A while ago it was decided that the English and Welsh GCSE (intermediate) reading examination would return to discrete skill testing. In other words, listening tests, for example, would not include target language reading or writing in the exam paper, since the aim is to assess listening and nothing else. At first glance this may seem reasonable, but the result in the classroom is that teachers adopt the same approach and thereby use less target language. Would it not be preferable if teachers used TL assessment styles such as multi-choice, matching or true/false/not mentioned in the TL? This gives you more "bang for your buck" in acquisition terms because students are clearly getting more contact with the second language.
You may argue that teaching is one thing and assessment another. Why shouldn't teachers stick to good methodological principles whatever the assessment regime?
Well, in reality, teachers, certainly in the English and Welsh system, like to practise exam technique to the n'th degree, since so much hangs on results. Past papers are used a good deal and, in addition, course books, often sponsored by exam boards, include exam style questions.
Maybe language teachers should just be a bit more courageous! They could stick to sound target language methodology and trust that the more language acquired in the long run will, anyway, lead to better outcomes, whatever the assessment style.
Better though, if the assessment regime reflected sound classroom practice and avoided using English as far as possible, in which case the backwash effect would be entirely positive.
Unfortunately the backwash effect can have a damaging influence on methodology. A while ago it was decided that the English and Welsh GCSE (intermediate) reading examination would return to discrete skill testing. In other words, listening tests, for example, would not include target language reading or writing in the exam paper, since the aim is to assess listening and nothing else. At first glance this may seem reasonable, but the result in the classroom is that teachers adopt the same approach and thereby use less target language. Would it not be preferable if teachers used TL assessment styles such as multi-choice, matching or true/false/not mentioned in the TL? This gives you more "bang for your buck" in acquisition terms because students are clearly getting more contact with the second language.
You may argue that teaching is one thing and assessment another. Why shouldn't teachers stick to good methodological principles whatever the assessment regime?
Well, in reality, teachers, certainly in the English and Welsh system, like to practise exam technique to the n'th degree, since so much hangs on results. Past papers are used a good deal and, in addition, course books, often sponsored by exam boards, include exam style questions.
Maybe language teachers should just be a bit more courageous! They could stick to sound target language methodology and trust that the more language acquired in the long run will, anyway, lead to better outcomes, whatever the assessment style.
Better though, if the assessment regime reflected sound classroom practice and avoided using English as far as possible, in which case the backwash effect would be entirely positive.
Comments
Post a Comment