This document discusses principles of language assessment according to several authors. It summarizes the key principles that Bachman and Palmer (1997), Brown (2004), and Coombe (2007) agree on, which are practicality, reliability, validity, authenticity, and washback. It also notes additional principles put forward by each author. Practicality refers to the relationship between required and available resources. Reliability concerns consistency of test scores. Validity means a test measures what it aims to measure. Authenticity involves using real-world language in test tasks. Washback refers to how testing impacts teaching and learning. The document concludes these principles are important for both experienced and new teachers to consider when designing effective assessment tools.

1. UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE LA SANTÍSIMA CONCEPCIÓN
FACULTAD DE EDUCACIÓN
DEPARTAMENTO DE LENGUAS
EVALUACIÓN DE LA COMPETENCIA COMUNICATIVA EN INGLÉS
PROFESORA MARIA GABRIELA SANHUEZA
GUIDO RIQUELME
ANA MARIA LUNA

2. It is mainly important for any subject involved in the teaching learning process, to be aware of the differences
between the concepts: assessment, test, and evaluation. The objective of a proper assessment is to promote
language performance in order that students be able to communicate in L2. We have to take into consideration
that by contextualizing the learning in authentic tasks, we can improve the motivation of the students making
them participate in activities that involves real context. Students should be measured on what they have been
taught at their respective schools, they need to be provided with comments and feedback in order to learn
about their own mistakes and improve their competences in the English.
As future teachers, it is primary important to comprehend the principles that the authors provide in regard to
language assessment in classrooms not only because these principles can improve our teaching process, but
also these principles are very helpful when we design worksheets, rubrics and evaluations for our students.
A revision of the principles of language assessment according to Brown (2004), Coombe (2007), and
Bachman & Palmer (1997), will be presented in the following paragraphs.
Bachman and Palmer, Douglas Brown and Coombe agree on 5 principles/qualities. Those are: Practicality,
Reliability, Validity, Authenticity, and Wash back. But Bachman and Palmer consider one principle that the
other two authors don’t consider. Equally, Coombe contemplate 2 principles that are not considered by the
other two authors.
According to Bachman and Palmer (1997) practicality can be defined as the correlation between the resources
available and the resources that are required at the moment of making a test. Coombe (2007) considers as
practicality the cost of the test, if it is adequate, in terms of length, to the time that is going to be implemented,
resources available, if it easy to mark, etc. Douglas Brown’s (2004) concept of practicality agrees with
Coombe’s.
Regarding reliability, Bachman and Palmer, Brown and Coombe agree on explaining reliability as a
consistency of the test score, on two contexts that are more or less similar. Brown (2004) adds the concepts of
student reliability, physical and psychological factors that might affect student’s performance at the moment
of sitting for a test; Rater reliability, Inter-rater reliability and intra-rater reliability, the reliability is directly
affected by the scorer; Administrator reliability “Unreliability may also result from the conditions in which
the test was administrated” (Brown, 2004, p.21); Test reliability, sometimes the test itself could affect its own
reliability. Coombe (2007) seconds Brown (2007) stating some aspects that might affect the reliability of a
test.
Validity, defined by Bachman and Palmer (1997) as construct validity. This means that the score represents
the validity of the test, and within that interpretation of the test scores should be given some justifications.
These justifications must provide justifications of the area of language that we, as teachers, want to measure.
According to Coombe (2007), construct validity is the equivalent methodologies of language learning and the
type of assessment corresponding to that methodology. Also, validity is described as the testing of what is

3. taught and how the teacher taught it using formats of assessments that are familiar to students. To Brown
(2004) a valid test measure what it said that is going to measure. Brown mentions five types of evidences that
demonstrate the validity of a test. The first evidence is called content-related validity; this means the
achievement of what is going to be measured. The second evidence is named criterion-related evidence; in
other words, if the test criterion was reached. The third evidence, construct-related evidence refers if the test
measure what is was meant to measure. The forth evidence, consequential validity, refers to the consequences
of the test itself. Finally face validity, the last evidence, is defined as the formal aspects of a test, how familiar
look to students.
Regarding authenticity Bachman and Palmer (1997), and Coombe (2007) agree when defining authenticity as
the use of the target language on test task should be as authentic (belonging to real world) situations. Coombe
(2007) explain that students feel more motivated when they are faced with tasks that imitate real world
situations. As Brown (2004) explains, many times authentic task become a failure at the moment of emulate
real world situations and they become mainly grammatical or lexical focused tasks.
Finally, the quality in which those three authors converge is wash back. Douglas brown (2004) explain wash
back as the process in which a student receive information about their performance and progress through
feedback. Also, how the student prepares for a test is considered wash back. Brown states that there is no
wash back if students receive a simple mark without any justification. Coombe (2007) states that wash back
can be considered as the effect that tests have on teaching and learning, and this could be either positive or
negative. For Bachman and Palmer (1997) wash back belong to a bigger principle that is called impact.
Impact can be divided into two groups: micro (Individuals, teachers and students) and macro (Society and
educational system), being wash back considered as micro aspect of impact.
According to Bachman and Palmer (1997), interactiveness can be considered as the amount of abilities that
the test taker possesses in order to fulfill the assignment. Those characteristics needed are explicated by
Bachman and Palmer as language abilities, topical knowledge and affective schemata.
Finally, two concepts considered only by Coombe (2007) transparency states the importance of clear and
accurate information to students about testing, including how it is going to be assessed, time given to
complete the test. Coombe (2007) asseverate that this principle in particular make the student part of the
testing process. Security is the last principle mentioned by Coombe and it makes reference and it is very close
to the concept of recycling. Recycling, in terms of assessment, means to use and reuse the test, since the test is
so well prepared and accomplish with all principles/qualities.
From our point of view, even though those three authors might consider the same principles or not, there
descriptions or considerations of them are not excessively different from each other. We consider that Brown
(2004) is the one author that presents all the essential principles that we need for a proper assessment. Brown
mentions that it is not only necessary design proper tests, but also keep on mind to maintain motivation on our
students considering their emotions, abilities and the environment where they are involve. Moreover, he

4. suggested the importance of give feedback to our students, it is highly important that learners know about
their own mistakes and their strengths.
In order to conclude, through this analysis we learnt guidelines for language assessment. These principles are
essential to be known and applied, not only for us training teachers, but also to those educators who have
more experience, since they may need to adjust their methodologies and take into consideration the learners’
needs, emotions, environment and learning styles. As future teachers, we need to have into consideration all
the principles/qualities already mentioned in order to make and ensure that our assessments tools are
completely useful, as Bachman and Palmer (2007) consider usefulness as a result of the combination of the
qualities. In addition, we consider that washback is an indispensable tool for us, because it is something that
we have observed in our progressive practices where teachers are not used to give feedback to learners we
they make a mistake, it is fundamental to give them feedback of their mistakes and their strengths in order to
increase their participation and motivation inside the classroom

5. References:
-Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. (1997). Language testing in practice: designing and developing useful
language tests. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
-Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment principles and classroom practices.New York: Pearson
Education
-Coombe, C., Folse, K. Hubley, N. (2007). A practical guide to assessing English language learners. Ann
Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.