Continuing the theme, here is the next post on my professional learning.
Nothing in this post should be understood as promoting, endorsing or otherwise commenting on any specific examination board or specification. These are thoughts on how examining, in general, has improved my practice as a teacher.
Firstly, the mark scheme is supreme. The mark scheme is incredibly well written and carefully designed to be as clear and objective as possible. It allows examiners to reach the same judgments as one another. For teachers, a sound understanding of the mark scheme/level descriptors of any exam course(s) you are teaching is possibly the single most important thing to develop. This understanding is what will allow you to zero in on the most pressing needs your students have and help you to guide them in how to address exam tasks.
Secondly, it’s a lot more objective than many folk might imagine. I’ve heard comments from people both inside and outside education claiming that marking speaking or writing is subjective because it’s not like maths with a right answer and a wrong answer. To them, I point out the following: I’ve been in an online moderation meeting with teachers from all over the world who themselves were taught and are now teaching in very different countries and contexts. Nonetheless, we can all arrive at a mark for a piece of writing within a range of a few points. And that’s the beginning of the process. Trained, standardised examiners will consistently reach the same judgment as the principal examiner. Likewise, I’ve sat in certification meetings for speaking examiners where a room of people all arrive at the same mark as each other (and all of the examiners worldwide), again within a range of tolerance. This is possible, because of my comments about the mark scheme above.
Thirdly, there are many ways to skin a cat (so the saying goes) and likewise, there are many ways to a good exam response. Be aware of anyone claiming that there is one way to full marks and it’s their way! Obviously, good responses have certain things in common, but because marking speaking and writing is not like marking maths, there are many things a candidate can do that will get maximum credit. It’s really interesting to see the different ways students have been taught to do tasks and how different methods can allow them to produce a quality answer.
Next, throwing learned chunks of language into a speaking exam is jarring and it’s equally obvious when a candidate has learned a written text and has then adapted it to fit what the writing task was. These candidates tend not to do as well as they perhaps would if they simply tackled the question in the moment with the most appropriate language and ideas they have.
Finally, it’s rewarding. As teachers, we spend a lot of time (for some teachers, all their contact time) preparing students to sit exams. Sitting on the other side of the equation and being able to give candidates credit for what they’ve done in the exam is a good feeling. Sometimes, a candidate will perform badly for any number of reasons and that’s certainly not fun for the examiner either, but it’s not usually the case. More often that not, you’re playing a small part in giving that candidate the moment of pride they will feel when they open the statement of results.
If you don’t already, I would thoroughly recommend looking at the courses you teach and investigate if it’s possible for you to train to examine one of them.
Chris Richards ELT 