A Comparative Study On The Content Validity Of The Listening Subtests Of TEMS And IELTS

As national standardized proficiency and criterion-referenced tests, TEM4andTEM8are developed on the basis of Teaching and Testing Syllabus for English Majorsto measure their language competence after two and four years’ studies respectively. In1991, they were first administrated by the National Foreign Languages TeachingAdvisory Committee under the Ministry of Education, P. R. China. After20years’development, they have grown into prevalent tests among English majors.IELTS, on the other hand, ranks the best known global test with its uniquefeatures as a communicative test. It is delivered in more than800testing centresand locations in over130countries, widely recognized as a convincing evidence ofapplicants’ language ability. With an increasing number of people seekingopportunities to go abroad, it accordingly has attracted more attention in China.Therefore, in regard to the popularity and importance of these tests, this studyattempts to examine (1) the respective characteristics of listening comprehension (LC)subtests in TEM4, TEM8and IELTS;(2) the content validity of TEM4, TEM8andIELTS; and (3) whether TEMs or IELTS require(s) a higher level of communicativelanguage ability within the framework of Bachman’s Test Method Facets (TMF) andCommunicative Language Ability (CLA).In order to conduct this study with a scientific and satisfactory result, the researchsubjects were selected with caution and in line with the newly revised framework ofTMF based on Bachman’s theory, and the Microsoft office Excel was employed toanalyze the data. Then the researcher compared the facets of test methods including thetesting environment, rubrics, characteristics of input and expected response as well asthe relationship between input and response. The results show that (1) IELTS is moredemanding with its various kinds of question type, fast speech rate and differentaccents;(2) the LC subtests in TEM8(2010) and IELTS8possess a better contentvalidity than TEM4(2010); and (3) IELTS8requires a higher level of communicativeability than TEM4(2010) and TEM8(2010). It is hoped that the findings and suggestions put forward by the present studywould shed some light on the improvement of TEMs towards the mode of“communicative test”.