Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland Guessing at a multiple-choice test of listening comprehension EALTA, Krakow
Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland Data Short written introspection: 226 test-takers justify their selection of a particular option at 17 items 973 973 responses (25% of all responses): ”a guess”, ”to guess” or similar Why & how? 247 of these include further comments 10 types of guessing
Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland Examples ’They talked too quickly, the answer is a pure guess’ ‘I did understand what was said on the tape, but I don’t understand options B and C, B is a stronger guess’ ’I made a guess, as I wasn’t sure’
Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland MC-tests and guessing Seldom completely random Informed guessing: –language use situations –problem solving in general Use affected by: –personality characteristics, –ability level –nature of the task (Haladyna, 1994; Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Linn & Miller, 2005)
10 types of guessing
Type of guessing and success
Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland Examples ’I heard the word restaurant and I made a guess’ ’A half-guess, she said something about losing weight’ ‘At least it can’t be A so either B or C. C is a guess…’ ’Not a complete guess, nor a sure answer either’
Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland Comments on guessing at a MC-test Guessing is indeed seldom random guessing, but is often based on available knowledge Guessing is not automatically a bad strategy associated with the MC-test format. Rather, bad items require bad guessing; a good item may lead to the use of the strategies of inferring, reasoning and elimination - ingredients of many communicative language use situations!
Joanna Anckar CALS, Jyväskylä University, Finland