qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui

opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
ACHIEVEMENT TEST
REPORT
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
[Type the document subtitle]
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
SUBMITTED TO
Dr. Geeta Sahni

klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
By

uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
Tathagata Dutta
Roll : 232
B. ED. (2009-10)

ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw
ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiop
asdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjkl
zxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm
CONTENTS

S. NO. TOPIC PAGE

NUMBERS

1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

2. EVALUATION AND EDUCATION

- INTRODUCTION
- CONTINUOUS AND COMPREHENSIVE
EVALUTAION
- FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE
EVALUATION
- CONCLUSION

3. CONCEPTS IN LANGUAGE TESTING

- INTRODUCTION
- TESTING LISTENING
- TESTING SPEAKING
- TESTING READING
- TESTING WRITING

4. TESTS AND TYPES OF TESTING

- PROFICIENCY TESTS
- ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
- DIAGONISTIC TESTS
- PLACEMENT TESTS

5. KINDS OF TESTING

6. MY LEARNERS’

7.. DETAILS OF THE SYLLABUS COVERED

8. BLUEPRINT AND ROUGH DRAFT OF THE

ACHIEVEMENT TEST

9. THE FRAMED ACHIEVEMENT TEST

10. ANALYSIS OF THE ACHIVEMENT TEST –

BEFORE THE TEST

11. MARKSHEET OF THE ENTIRE CLASS

12. DETAILED MARKSHEET OF THE HIGH AND
LOW ACHIVERS GROUP

13. ITEM ANALYSIS AND ITEM

DISCRIMINATION

14. ANALYSIS OF THE OBJECTIVE TYPE ITEMS

15. ANALYSIS OF THE SUBJECTIVE TYPE ITEMS

16. ACHIVEMENT TEST ANALYSIS AT A GLANCE

17. WHAT IS STATISTICS?

- HISTOGRAM, FREQUENCY CURVE

18. MEASURES OF CENTRAL TENDENCY

- ARITHMETIC MEAN

- MEDIAN

- MODE

- STANDARD DEVIATION

19.. OVERALL ANALYSIS

20. BIBLIOGRAPHY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am very thankful to my mentor and guide in the central Institute

of Education, Dr. Sahni, for being patient with me and allowing this
Achievement Test report a success. I am also thankful to Ms. Shubhangi,
where previous ATR provided scaffolding to the creation of this record.
My special thanks to Mr. Tulika Rajpal who has been a kind soul and
helped us during our teaching practice and also while making this report.
I would also convey my regards to the institution, Government
Senior Secondary School for Boys, 1, Roopnagar. I am also thankful to
the library and the staff at the Central Institute and at the British Council.
My special thanks to all my hostel mates who had been kind and very co-
operative during the preparation of the report.
EVALUATION AND EDUCATION

Evaluation is the process of determining the extent to which pupils

achieve instructional objectives. It is a scheme for collecting evidence of
behavioral changes in the learners and judge the direction and extent of
such changes. Evaluation is a continuous process and forms an integral
part of the total system of education and is vary closely related to
educational objectives. It exercises a good influence on pupils study
habits and also speaks about the method that has been used by the teacher.
Thus, it not only helps to measure educational achievement but also how
to improve it.
The purpose of evaluation is to make provisions for guiding the
growth of the learners to diagnose their strengths and weakness and point
out areas where remedial measures are devised. It makes a judgment on
the quality or worth of an educational programme or student’s
achievement and provides for a subsequent modification of the
curriculum.
Wrightstone defines evaluation, a relatively new technical term, as
“the method to designate a more comprehensive concept of measurement
that is implied in conventional tests and examinations...the emphasis in
measurement is upon single aspects of subject matter achievement in
specific skills and abilities...the emphasis in evaluation is upon broad
changes and major objectives of on educational programme. These
include not only subject matter achievement but also attitudes, interests,
ideas, ways of thinking, work habits and personal and social
adaptability.”
CONTINUOUS AND COMPREHENSIVE
EVALUATION

In order to meet the objective of real education, there is a need to

continuously and comprehensively evaluate children. In fact,
educationalists argue that if we really want to education system to turn
the corner and bring about the coveted all round development of the
personality of the child, them continuous and comprehensive evaluation
is the way forward.
The continuous aspects takes care of the ‘continual’ (placement and
formative evaluation) part of evaluation and the comprehensive
component takes care of assessment of all round development of the
child’s personality. It includes assessment in the process of reasoning
from evidence. To design assessments of students learning that will
provide useful evidence requires that we coordinate and align three key
components: COGNITION, which refers to a model of thinking and
learning of students within the subject domain, OBSERVATIONS; the
takes or activities that students engage in that provide evidence of
learning; and INTERPRETATION, the process or methods for making
sense of the evidence.

ASSESSMENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES

INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES

Assessments are effective and useful only to the degree that these three
components are in synchrony.
In the Indian education system, the term evaluation and assessment
is associated with examination, stress and anxiety. The National
Curriculum Frameworks (2005) seek to provide guidelines for a good
evaluation and examination system that can become an integral part of
the learning process and benefit both the learners themselves and the
educational system by giving valuable feedback.
White speaking on school stages and assessment in chapter 3 of
NCF (2005) the frames state the assessment required at different stages:-
 For ECCE and classes I and II of the Elementary stage, assessment
must be purely qualitative judgments of children’s activities in
various domains. There should be no test, oral or written.
 For class III to VIII of the Elementary stage, a various methods
may be used but these should be seen as part of the teaching
process and not a constant threat.
 For class IX to class XII of the secondary and Higher Secondary
Stage, assessment may be based more on tests, examinations and
projects for the knowledge-based areas of the curriculum, along
with self-assessment.

FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE

EVALUATION

Evaluation may be undertaken for three principal reasons:

1. Accountability
2. Curriculum development and betterment.
3. Self-development: teachers and other language teaching professionals.

Evaluation for the purpose of accountability

This is mainly concerned with determining whether there has been
value for money, in other words whether something has been both
effective and efficient. Generally, the information derived from this is not
used in any major way to improve the functioning of the curriculum or
classroom practice. Rather, it provides us with the information whether
something should be continued or discontinued. Evaluations of this type
are largely, although not exclusively, the domain of policy makes or
provides of resources. Usually, such evaluations are carried out after an
innovation has been running for some time, or at the end of the project.
This type of evaluation, known as SUMMATIVE EVALUATION, has
also tended to involve testing and measurement, and analyses of the
statistical importance of results obtained. Summative evaluations are
limited by their focus on overall outcomes at the end of an educational
innovation.

Evaluation for purpose of curriculum development

Teachers have a key role to play in the curriculum renewal and
development process. It is the teacher, rather than the ‘tester’ or the
evaluation ‘expert’, who has most information about specific classroom
context. This information may be reported at various times and in various
forms, for example as responses to questionnaires, interviews, records, or
diary keeping. It may be largely descriptive and qualitative, and need not
entail tests, measurements, and inferences about curriculum quality from
statistical data. This type of evaluation which is intended to improve the
curriculum by gathering data from different people oven a period of time
is called FORMATIVE EVALUATION. Such evaluations are ongoing
and monitor developments by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of
all aspects for teaching and learning. As opposed to merely passing an
evaluative judgment on the end product of a teaching programme,
formative evaluation is designed to provide information that may be used
as the basis for future planning and action.

Evaluation for the purposes of teacher self development

A third and major role that evaluation has to play is in formalizing
and extending a teacher’s knowledge about teaching and learning in
classrooms. This is sometimes referred to as ILLUMINATIVE
EVALUATION, because it involves raising the consciousness of teachers
and after ELT practitioners as to what actually happens in the language
teaching classroom. This type of evaluation is developmental and
formative in nature and the focus is more on the process and less on the
end product, on the teaching and learning and has a major role to play in
teacher self-development.
CONCLUSION

When we evaluate different aspects of the teaching and the learning

process, it becomes important to make explicit the criteria used in our
judgments, and to be principled in our evaluation. It prepared and ad-hoc
evaluations are likely to be unreliable, unfair and also uninformative.
They do not provide a suitable base to make any educational decision.

Evaluation means much more than administering tests to learners

and analyzing the results. It not only focuses on the learner but also
makes a commentary on the process of teaching as well. Successful
evaluation should be systematic. In order to teaching this we need to take
into account the concept of management as reflected through our
leadership skills. As teachers we used to be aware of the role of manages
and evaluate our management styles. We need to know why we wish to
evaluate, what evaluation is for, and how to organize it.
CONCEPTS IN LANGUAGE
TESTING

English is the official associate language in India and as such

becomes the second language for national curriculum framework. With
the growing importance of English in every aspect of public life, the
teaching of English language has also evolved through the decades. At
present most language teachers follow the ‘Communicative Language
Teaching’ (CLT) method in the classroom environment. The focus is on
fluency and the guided approach to help the learner arrive at the accurate
way of using the foreign language. The rules of the language are not
given; a convert method is followed where the learners are guided to
arrive at the rules. The teaching of English language can be divided into
four categories or skills:

LISTENING
RECEPTIVE ORAL
SPEAKING
READING
PRODUCTIVE WRITTEN
WRITING

While conducting a language test all four skills have to be kept in mind,
along with the usage of grammar and vocabulary. However, all the four
skills have a different set of consideration, ways of testing and their
evaluation. We shall consider all the skills in the following sections.
TESTING LISTENING

An oral and receptive skill, the testing of listening parallels in most

ways the testing of reading. But there may be situations where the testing
of oral ability is considered, for one reason or another, impractical; and so
a test of listening should be included to judge the backwash effect and
also for tested for diagnostic purposes.
The special problems in constructing listening tests arise out of the
transient nature of the spoken language. A listening test should be able to
test the following abilities of the learners.
 Ability to obtain the gist.
 Ability to follow on argument.
 Ability to recognize the attitude of the speaker.
To test ability of the learners, the teacher has to be careful about the
sample of speech/text and has to keep in mind the test specifications. To
test the native speakers, samples should be taken for authentic speech.
Possible sources are the radio, television, the Internet and even our own
recordings.

TESTING SPEAKING
The objective of teaching spoken language is the development of
the ability to interact successfully in that language, and that this involves
comprehension as well as production. The representative tasks can be
grope under the following heads:
 EXPRESSIONS - Likes/dislikes, agreement/disagreement,
preferences, opinions
 DIRECTING - Instruction, persuading, advising
 DESCRIBING - Actions, events, objects, people, process.
 ELICITING - Information, directions, classifications.
 NARRATION - Sequence of events
 REPORTING - Description, comment, decisions and choices.
The skills that are tested while taking a test on oral ability can be sub-
divided into two broad heads - Informational and Interactional skills. In
the task, the student should be informative about the theme and also
interact with other students. While evaluating the skills in managing
interactions, the following abilities should be kept in mind-
 Initiate interactions.
 Charge the topic of an interaction
 Share the responsibility for the development of an interaction
 Take their turns and give turns to other speakers.
 Come to a Decision
 End an interaction.
The test-taken has to choose an appropriate technique. The test may be in
the form of an interview, role play, interpretation, prepared monologue,
reading about, responses to audio / video recordings, simulated
conversations.

TESTING READING

Reading used to be the principal aim of most foreign-language

courses and it was developed through textual analyses, vocabulary tests,
and translations into English, listening and speaking were merely taught
to be the by products. But with the change in approaches to teaching a
foreign language, there is a new goal in reading - not a verbatim
translation but total comprehension without recourse to English.
The primary aim in teaching a foreign language was to enable
students to read foreign texts in the original. Thus, when a student learns
to read a foreign language, his/her mind should also be functioning in that
language. Reading requires a familiarity on the put of the reader with the
two fundamental building blocks of that particular language structure and
vocabulary. The broader the particular language, structure and
vocabulary, the broader the students knowledge of structure and the
greater the vocabulary and the more difficult text he / she will be able to
approach. Consequently, two general types of test items are necessary to
evaluate student reading potential: Vocabulary items and structural
(Syntactical and morphological) items.
Reading can be differentiated from writing, speaking, and listening
by another characteristics speed. In learning a new language the student
wishes eventually to read it easily and rapidly. Fluency in speaking and
ease in listening comprehension correspond to speed in reading. The tasks
that are generated while testing a student’s reading skill depend on the
speed of the learner. There is a distinction, based on the difference of
purpose, between expeditions reading and slow and careful reading.
In expeditions reading operations, candidates may be asked to do:-
1. SKIMMING, where the objective is to-
 Obtain main ideas and discourse topic quickly and
efficiently
 Establish quickly the structure of a text,
 Decide the relevance of the text to their needs.
2. SCANNING, where the objective is to find -
 Specific words or phrases;
 figures, percentages
 Specific items in an index;
 Specific names in a bibliography or a set of references.

In a careful reading operation, candidates may be asked to

 Identity discourse makers;
 Interpret complex sentences;
 Interpret topic sentences and logical organization of the text;
 Identify implicitly and explicitly stated main ideas;
 Recognize writer’s intentions;
 Distinguish between fact from opinion, hypothesis from fact;
 Infer the meaning of an unknown word from context;
 Make pragmatic inferences.

TESTING WRITING

Of the four language skills, writing may truly be considered the

most sophisticated. In listening and in reading, the student receives a
message formulated by another; his role is passive even though he may be
mentally interpreting and analyzing what it she is hearing or reading. In
speaking, the student is engaged in communicating his own ideas and
feelings, but with approximations and explanations. Communication
through the written word, on the other hand, possesses a certain degree of
finality and demands real proficiency from the winter if it is to be
effective. The mechanics - vocabulary, spelling, and grammar must be
mastered before the student can aspire to precision of expression, fluency,
and style. Tests must consequently be so structured that they measure the
various aspects of student’s progress toward the acquisition of this skill.
This can be achieved it is divided into three parts-
 We have to set writing tasks that are properly representative of the
population of tasks that we should expect the students to be able to
perform.
 The tasks should elicit valid samples of writing.
 It is essential that the samples of the writing can and will be scored
validly and reliably.
TESTS AND TYPES OF TESTING

Tests can be categorized according to the types of information they

provide. This categorization is useful because it not only helps in
deciding whether an existing test is suitable for a particular purpose but
also in writing new tests where these are:
(a) Proficiency tests
(b) Achievement tests
(c) Diagnostic tests
(d) Placement tests

Proficiency tests are designed to measure people’s ability in a

language, regardless of any training they may have had in that language.
The content of a proficiency test, therefore, is not based on the content or
objectives of language courses that people taking the test may have
followed. Rather, it is based on a specification of what candidates have to
be able to do in the language in order to be considered proficient. This
raises the question of what we mean by the word ‘proficient’.
In the case of some proficiency tests, ‘proficiency’ means having
sufficient command of the language for a particular purpose. Such a test
many even attempt to take into account the level and kind of English
needed to follow courses in particular subject areas. it might, for example,
have one form of the test for acts subjects, another for sciences and so on.
Whatever the particular purpose to which the language is to be put, this
will be reflected in the test content at an early stage of the test
development.
There are other proficiency tests which, by contrast, do not have
any occupation or course of study in mind. But these general proficiency
tests should have a detailed specification on what it is that the successful
candidates have demonstrated that they can do. Despite differences
between them in relation to content and level of difficulty, all proficiency
tests have in common the fact that they are not on courses that candidates
have previously taken.

In contrast to proficiency tests, it is much more probable that they

will be involved in the preparation and use of achievement tests.
The achievement test is directly related to language courses, their purpose
being to establish how successful individual students, groups of students,
or the courses themselves have been in achieving objectives. There are
two kinds of achievement test: final achievement test and progressive
achievement test.

Final achievement tests are those administered at the end of

a course of study. They content of these tests must be related to the
courses with which they are concerned. Because its content is so firmly
based on the syllabus or on the books and manuals used, it has been also
called as the ‘syllabus content approach’. It has an obvious appeal, since
the test only contains what it is thought that the students have actually
encountered, and thus in this respect, can be called a fair test. The
disadvantage of such a test is that if the syllabus in badly designed, then
the results of the test can be very misleading.
An alternative approach is to base the tests content directly on the
objectives of the course. This has number of advantages. First, it compels
course designers to be explicit about objectives. Secondly, it makes it
possible for performance on the test to show jus how far students have
achieved those objectives. This in turn puts pressure on those responsible
for the syllabus and for the selection of books and materials to ensure that
are consistent with the course objectives.
One may wonder if there is any real difference between the final
achievement tests and proficiency tests. If a test is based on the objectives
of a course, and these are equivalent to the language needs on which a
proficiency test is based, there is no reason to expect a difference between
the form and content of the two tests. But two things have to remember.
First, objectives and needs will not typically coincide in this way.
Secondly, many achievement tests are not in fact based on course
objectives. These facts name implication both for the uses of the test
results and for the test writers. It was to know on what basis on
achievement test has been constructed, and be aware of the possibly
limited validity and applicability of the test scores. Test writers, on the
other hand, must create achievement tests that reflect the objectives of a
particular course, and not expect a general proficiency test to provide a
satisfactory alternative.
Progressive achievement tests, as their name suggests, are
intended to measure the progress that students are making. They
contribute to formative assessment. One way to measure progress would
be to take achievement tests at regular basis. But in addition to this, the
teacher has also to create a set of ‘pop quizzes’ which would provide a
rough check on the student’s progress.

Diagnostic tests are used to identify learners’ strengths and

weaknesses. They are intended primarily to ascertain what learning still
needs to take place. We can be fairly confident of our ability to create
tests that will us that someone is particularly weak, way in speaking as
opposed to reading in a language.
But there is lack of good diagnostic test. This is because the size of
such test would make it impractical to administer in a routine fashion.
Diagnostic could be extremely useful for individualized instructions.
Learners would be shown where gaps exist in their command of the
language, and could be happily directed to sources of information,
exemplification and practice.

Placement tests, as their name suggests, are intended to

provide the required information that will help to place students at the
stage of the teaching programme most appropriate to their abilities.
Typically, they are used to assign students to classes at different levels.
The placement tests depend on the identification of the key features at
different levels of teaching in the institution.
MY LEARNERS’
I was assigned to teach English to class XI learners of Government
senior secondary school for boys, Roopnagar. The students of this section
had the Arts program of CBSE. Though the class strength was of 35
students were of 36 students, 7 of them had opted for Sanskrit.

The students were bright and eager to learn. But they have been
ingrained and conditioned into a method of learning that was teacher-
oriented. This posed a problem for me at the beginning as they were very
reluctant to speak up in class. They expected me to provide them with the
answer. But slowly they started to open up and started to speak in English
and take part in class discussions confidently.

The class was a pretty boisterous one and as a teacher I was

sometimes at a loss while dealing with some of the more mischievous
learners. But, in the end, all of them came to love the subject. Though
they were still a bit hesitant in the usage of the language, they were
definitely on the road where they will be more confident while dealing
with the language.
DETAILS OF THE SYLLABUS
COVERED

S. NO. LINGUISTIC AREA TOPIC

1. Prose The Adventure

2. Poetry The Browning Version

3. Reading Note-making

4. Writing Letter to the editor

5. Grammar Reported speech

Idioms

Tenses
CLASS EXAM NAME MARKS % OBTAINED
ROLL ROLL NO. OBTAINED
NO.

1. XIA1 AMAN PREET SINGH 28 47 %

2. XIA2 ARVIND 37 62%
3. XIA3 BHARAT KUMAR 34 57%
4. XIA4 CHITRANJAN KUMAR 39 65%
5. XIA5 DEEPAK SHARMA 43 72%
6. XIA6 GANGESH KUMAR JHA 28 47%
7. XIA7 HARI GOVIND NIRALA 37 62%
8. XIA8 JASPAL SINGH 30 50%
9. XIA9 MAHENDER SHUKLA 29 48%

10. XIA10 MANOJ 32 53%

11. XIA11 MANOJ KUMAR 31 52%
12. XIA12 MELEKHRAJ MAHAGURUJI 40 67%
13. XIA13 MAYANK KHANDELWAL 29 48%
14. XIA14 PANKAJ SINGH 38.5 64%
15. XIA15 PRABHAKAR PAL 33 55%
16. XIA16 RAHUL 21 33%
17. XIA17 RAHUL 25 42%
18. XIA18 RAHUL MATHUR 38 63%
19. XIA19 RAJU CHAUDHURI Ab. --
20. XIA20 RANI GOSWAMI 32 53%
21. XIA21 SARAFAT ALI 27 45%
22. XIA22 SUNNY SINGH 30 50%
23. XIA23 TEJASVI SANKAR 29 48%
24. XIA24 VIKAS KANT 41 68%
25. XIA25 VINOD NEGI 41 68%
26. XIA26 VIVEK PANDEY 34 57%
27. XIA27 VIRENDER SINGH Ab. --
28. XIA28 YODENDER SINGH 32 32%
29. XIA29 ZUNAID AHMED Ab. --

MARKSHEET OF THE ENTIRE

CLASS

MARKSHEET OF THE ENTIRE

CLASS AND THEIR GRADES:

CLASS EXAM NAME MARKS % GRADE

ROLL ROLL NO. OBTAINED OBTAINED
NO.

1. XIA1 AMAN PREET SINGH 28 47 % C+

2. XIA2 ARVIND 37 62% B+
3. XIA3 BHARAT KUMAR 34 57% B
4. XIA4 CHITRANJAN KUMAR 39 65% B++
5. XIA5 DEEPAK SHARMA 43 72% A
6. XIA6 GANGESH KUMAR JHA 28 47% C+
7. XIA7 HARI GOVIND NIRALA 37 62% B++
8. XIA8 JASPAL SINGH 30 50% C++
9. XIA9 MAHENDER SHUKLA 29 48% C+

10. XIA10 MANOJ 32 53% C++

11. XIA11 MANOJ KUMAR 31 52% C++
12. XIA12 MELEKHRAJ MAHAGURUJI 40 67% B++
13. XIA13 MAYANK KHANDELWAL 29 48% C+
14. XIA14 PANKAJ SINGH 38.5 64% B+
15. XIA15 PRABHAKAR PAL 33 55% B
16. XIA16 RAHUL 21 33% F
17. XIA17 RAHUL 25 42% C
18. XIA18 RAHUL MATHUR 38 63% B+
19. XIA19 RAJU CHAUDHURI Ab. -- --
20. XIA20 RANI GOSWAMI 32 53% C++
21. XIA21 SARAFAT ALI 27 45% C+
22. XIA22 SUNNY SINGH 30 50% C++
23. XIA23 TEJASVI SANKAR 29 48% C+
24. XIA24 VIKAS KANT 41 68% B++
25. XIA25 VINOD NEGI 41 68% B++
26. XIA26 VIVEK PANDEY 34 57% B
27. XIA27 VIRENDER SINGH Ab. -- --
28. XIA28 YODENDER SINGH 32 32% F
29. XIA29 ZUNAID AHMED Ab. -- --

THE LEARNERS ARE GRADED IN ACCORDANCE

WITH THE FOLLOWING TABLE:

RANGE OF PERCENTAGE GRADE

OBTAINED
95-85 O
84-80 A++
79-75 A+
74-70 A
69-65 B++
64-60 B+
59-55 B
54-50 C++
49-45 C+
44-40 C
39-35 D
LESS THAN 35 F

ITEM ANALYSIS: DIFFICULTY AND

DISCRIMINATION

Item analysis is a process which involves a careful of score

pattern on each of the test items. The analysis tells us that how well each
item is working, that is, the contribution it is making to the overall picture
of the candidates ability emerging from the test. The analysis of the
students’ responses to the objective-test items is a powerful tool for
improvement and for accumulating a bank of high quality items. It
suggests why an item is not effective and how it might be improved.
The analysis of the responses to the individual items of a test is helpful
for two broad reasons. First, the teacher can discover if there are certain
points that a sizeable number of students have failed to master. Second,
the teacher can verify how well certain items have be done in relation to
the test as a whole. This information will be useful in the construction of
new test. Item analysis usually provides two kinds of information on the
test items:
 ITEM DIFFICULTY, which helps us to decide if the test item are
right for the target group.
 ITEM DIFFICULTY, which helps us to see if the individual items
are providing information on the candidates abilities are consistent
with that provided by the other items of the test.
Item difficulty is determined by the observation of what percentage of
students answer the item correctly. The more difficult the item is, the
fewer will be the students who select the correct answer. The level of
difficulty of an item is calculated in the following manner:

 For objective items,

Level of difficulty = (total no. of correct responses of High group + total no.
of correct responses of Low group) / (total no. of students x 100)

 For subjective items

Level of difficulty = (total frequency of marks of High group + total

frequency of marks of Low group) / (total no. of students x 100 x marks
per question)

The analysis of the score is done as follows:

LEVEL OF DIFFICULTY THE ITEM IS…

ABOVE 90% EASY

BETWEEN 80% - 90% QUESTIONABLE

BETWEEN 50% - 80% GOOD

BETWEEN 30% - 50% QUESTIONABLE

BELOW 30% DIFFICULT

ITEM DISCRIMINATION tells us how well the items perform in

separating the better students from the poorer ones. If the upper third of
the students gets the items correct and lower two-third generally gets the
items wrong, then it is a good discriminator between the two groups. Very
difficult items should discriminate between the very good students and all
of the others; relatively easy items should discriminate between the
majority of students in the class and the few poor ones. The item
discrimination level is calculated in the following manner:

 for objective items:

Level of discrimination = (Total no. of correct responses in the high group

– Total no. of correct responses in the low group) / (0.5 x total no. of
students in both groups)

 for subjective items:

Level of discrimination = (Total frequency of marks in high group – total

frequency of marks in low group) / (0.5 x total no. of students in both
group x marks per question)

The analysis of the score is done as follows:

LEVEL OF DISCRIMINATION THE ITEM IS…

0 – 0.2 VERY POOR

0.2 – 0.4 POOR

0.4 – 0.6 AVERAGE

0.6 – 0.8 GOOD

0.8 – 1.0 BEST

KINDS OF TESTING
The test that is created by the language teacher takes into consideration
the different approaches to test construction. Some of the different
approaches are described as below:

DIRECT TESTING:

Testing is said to be direct when it requires the candidate to perform

precisely the skill that we wish to measure. If we want to know how well
candidates can write compositions, we get them to write compositions.
The tasks, and the texts that are used, should be as authentic as possible.
It is easier to carry out when it is intended to measure the productive
skills of speaking and writing, testers have to devise methods of eliciting
such evidence accurately and without the method interfering with the
performance of skills in which they are interested. Direct testing has a
number of attractions. First, provided that we are clear about just what
abilities we want to assess, it is relatively straight-forward to create the
conditions which will elicit the behaviour on which to base our
judgements. Secondly, at least in the case of the productive skills, the
assessment and interpretation of student’s performance is also quite
straight-forward. Thirdly, since practice for the test involves practice of
the skills that we wish to foster, there is likely to be helpful backwash
effect.

DISCRETE-POINT TESTING:
This refers to the testing of one element at a time, item by item. This
might, for example, take the form of a series of items, each testing a
particular grammatical structure. It will almost always be in=direct.
Diagnostic tests of grammar of the kind referred to in an earlier section
will be part of the discrete point testing.

INTEGRATIVE TESTING:

As opposed to discrete point testing, the integrative testing requires the

candidate/student to combine many language elements in the completion
of the task. This might involve writing a composition, making notes while
listening to a lecture, taking a dictation or even a completion of a cloze
passage.

NORM-REFERENCED TESTING:

When a test is designed to provide the information which relates to one

candidate’s performance to that of the other candidates is called norm-
referenced testing. We are not told directly what the student is capable of
doing in the language. For example, if we have to judge the reading test
of an individual student and make a statement on the performance, we
may give two kinds of answers. The student can obtain a score that puts
him or her in the top 10% of the rest of the candidates, or in the bottom
5%; or that he or she did better than 60% of those who took it.

CRITERION REFERENCED TESTING:

The purpose of these tests is to classify people according to whether or

not they are able to perform some tasks or a set of tasks satisfactorily. The
tasks are set, and those who perform them satisfactorily, ‘pass’; those
who do not, ‘fail.’ This means that the students are encouraged to
measure their progress in relation to a meaningful criterion. These tests
have two positive virtues:

 They set meaningful standards in terms of what people can do,

which do not change with different groups of candidates.

 They motivate the candidates to achieve those standards.

ANALYSIS OF THE SUBJECTIVE
TYPE ITEMS
There are eleven subjective type items. Section A and section B,
which test the reading and writing capabilities of the learner, are of
subjective nature. Several items in Section D, the literature portion, deal
with the subjective understanding of the learners.

A.1. Read the following passage and make a note:

This question would test the learners reading skill. It will also tell how
fast the readers can read a section on the “Early life of Akbar.” Since the
students have taken up Arts program, I thought that something which was
part of their course would be of immense help. Marking would be done
on following the format, word limit and the use of language while making
the note.

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
6 III 18 6 0 0
5 IIII 20 5 I 5
4.5 0 0 4.5 I 4.5
4 I 4 4 I 4
3 I 3 3 II 6
2 0 0 2 I 2
1 0 0 1 I 1
0 0 0 0 II 0

TOTAL 45 24.5

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(45 + 24.5) / (18 X 7)} X 100

= 55 %
 GOOD
ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (45 – 24.5) / (½ X 18 X 7)

= (20.5 / 63)

= 0.3

 POOR

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Around 55% of the students have answered this item correctly, which
makes the item good in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is poor, since the value is 0.3

ANALYSIS:
The item is ACCEPTABLE.

Suggestion:
The learners have tried to keep to the word limit. But there is a definite
problem in a coherent sentence formation and lack of strength of the
vocabulary. There should more practice of note making so that they can
further improve on their present knowledge and ability.

-------------------------------

B.1. Write a letter to the editor of a national newspaper regarding the

dismal state of traffic in front of your school, especially when the
school gets over.
A letter to the editor would allow the evaluation and testing of
the expression ability of the learners. The learners can core good
marks if they can get the format of the formal letter correct. The
teacher would also check on their coherency while presenting their
argument.

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
8 II 16 8 0 0
7 II 14 7 0 0
6 I 6 6 0 0
5 II 10 5 II 10
4 I 4 4 I 4
3 I 3 3 II 6
2 0 0 2 II 4
0 0 0 0 II 0

TOTAL 53 24

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(53 + 24) / (18 X 10)} X 100

= 42%

 QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (53 – 24) / (½ X 18 X 10)

= 0.3

 POOR

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 42% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item questionable in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is poor, since the value is 0.3
ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.

Suggestion:
Most of the learners scored good in the maintaining a correct format
of the letter to the editor. But, as in the note-making, there was some
problem in the coherent structuring of the sentence while presenting
their argument.

---------------------------------

Section D
1. 1. Name the poet. Why does he say that he would ‘sing about
“The Tale of Melon City”? (1.5 MARKS)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
1.5 - - 1.5 - -
1 IIIIIII 7 1 IIIIII 6
0 II 0 0 III 0

TOTAL 7 6

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(7 + 6) / (18 X 1.5)} X 100

= 49%

QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (7 – 6) / (½ X 18 X 1.5)
= 0.07

 VERY POOR

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 49% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item questionable in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.07

ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.

---------------------------------

2. b. Do you think that they were fitting titles? (2MARKS)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
2 - 0 2 0 0
1 IIIII III 8 1 IIIII II 7
0 I 0 0 II 0

TOTAL 8 7

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(8+ 7) / (18 X 2)} X 100

= 41%

 QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (8 – 7) / (½ X 18 X 2)

= 0.05
 VERY POOR

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 41% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item questionable in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.05

ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.

------------------------------

3. b. What happened after that? (3 marks)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
2.5 I 2.5 2.5 0 0
2 II 4 2 I 2
1 III 3 1 IIII 4
½` 1 ½ ½` 0 0
0 II 0 0 IIII 0

TOTAL 10 6

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(10 + 6) / (18 X 3)} X 100

= 29%

 DIFFICULT

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (10 – 6) / (½ X 18 X 3)

= 0.1
 VERY POOR

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 29% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item difficult in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.1.

ANALYSIS:
The item is UNACCEPTABLE.

---------------------------------

4. b. Give two examples of irony. (2 marks)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
2 0 0 2 I 2
1 IIIII II 7 1 IIIII I 6
0 II 0 0 II 0

TOTAL 7 8

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(7 + 8) / (18 X 2)} X 100

= 42%

 QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (7 – 8) / (½ X 18 X 2)
= 0.05

 VERY POOR

DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 42% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item questionable in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.05

ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.
------------------------------

2. 4. b. In what context is it being used here? (1 mark)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
1 IIIII I 6 1 IIIII I 6
½ I ½ ½ 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 6½ 6

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(6.5 + 6) / (18 X 1)} X 100

= 67%

 GOOD

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (6.5 – 6) / (½ X 18 X 1)

= 0.05
 VERY POOR
DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Around 67% of the students have answered this item correctly, which
makes the item good in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.05

ANALYSIS:
The item is ACCEPTABLE.

-------------------------

D. 2.5. Give two reasons why you like or dislike this play? (2marks)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
2 II 4 2 0 0
1.5 I 1.5 1.5 0 0
1 III 3 1 IIIII I 6
0 III 0 0 III 0

TOTAL 8.5 6

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(8.5 + 6) / (18 X 2)} X 100

= 40%

 QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (8.5 – 6) / (½ X 18 X 2)

= 0.27

 POOR
DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 40% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item QUESTIONABLE in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is POOR, since the value is 0.27

ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.

--------------------------

3. c. 2 what was the plan of action decided by the professor?

(1 marks)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
1 IIIII III 8 1 IIIII III 8
0 I 0 0 I 0

TOTAL 8 8

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(8 + 8) / (18 X 1)} X 100

= 88%

 QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (8 – 8) / (½ X 18 X 1)

= 0.0

 VERY POOR
DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Over 88% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item questionable in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0

ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.

-----------------------

D.3.G. What did he do? How did the audience react?

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
2 I 2 2 I 2
1.5 I 1.5 1.5 0 0
1 III 3 1 IIIII 5
½ II 1 ½ 0 0
0 II 0 0 III 0

TOTAL 7.5 7

ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(7.5 + 7) / (18 X 2)} X 100

= 40%

 QUESTIONABLE

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (7.5 – 7) / (½ X 18 X 2)

= 0.05

 VERY POOR
DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 40% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item questionable in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.05

ANALYSIS:
The item is QUESTIONABLE.

------------------------

D.3.K. Given the fact that the accounts of history written by Bakhar
can be highly disputed, how did Rajendra try to explain the fantastic
happening with the help of science? (4 marks)

HIGH GROUP LOW GROUP

Marks Tally Frequency Marks Tally Frequency
3 I 3 3 0 0
2 IIII 8 2 I 2
1 I 1 1 IIIII 5
0 III 0 0 III 0

TOTAL 12 7
ITEM DIFFICULTY

= {(12 + 7) / (18 X 4)} X 100

= 27%

 DIFFICULT

ITEM DISCRMINATION

= (12 – 7) / (½ X 18 X 4)

= 0.1

 VERY POOR
DETAILED ANALYSIS:
Only 27% of the students have answered this item correctly, which makes
the item difficult in the difficulty index and with regards to the
discrimination index, the item is very poor, since the value is 0.1

ANALYSIS:
The item is UNACCEPTABLE.

------------------------------

REVIEW OF THE ACHIEVEMENT

TEST AT A GLANCE:

SECTION ITEM PART LEVEL OF DIFIICULTY LEVEL OF DISCRIMINATION FINAL ANALYSIS

% ANALYSIS VALUE ANALYSIS

A 1. 55% GOOD 0.3 POOR ACCEPTABLE

B 1. 42% QUESTIONABLE 0.3 POOR QUESTIONABLE

C 2 a. 78% GOOD 0.02 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE

b. 61% GOOD 0.3 POOR ACCEPTABLE
c. 44% QUESTIONABLE 0.2 POOR QUESTIONABLE
d. 78% GOOD 0.2 POOR ACCEPTABLE

C 3 a. 72% GOOD 0.1 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE

b. 50% GOOD 0.3 POOR ACCEPTABLE
c. 56% GOOD 0.2 POOR ACCEPTABLE
d. 56% GOOD 0.0 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE

C 4 a. 72% GOOD 0.1 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE

b. 66% GOOD 0.0 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
c. 50% GOOD 0.3 POOR ACCEPTABLE
d. 61% GOOD -0.1 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE

D 1.1 49% QUESTIONABLE 0.07 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE

1.2 a 61% GOOD 0.01 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
b 41% QUESTIONABLE 0.05 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE
1.3 a 50% GOOD 0.3 POOR ACCEPTABLE
b 29% DIFFICULT 0.1 VERY POOR UNACCEPTABLE
1.4 a 78% GOOD 0.2 POOR ACCEPTABLE
b 42% QUESTIONABLE 0.05 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE

D 2.1 a 72% GOOD 0.3 POOR ACCEPTABLE

b 94% EASY -0.1 VERY POOR UNACCEPTABLE
2.2 a 83% QUESTIONABLE 0.3 POOR QUESTIONABLE
b 83% QUESTI0NABLE -0.1 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE
2.3 a 82% QUESTIONABLE 0.3 POOR QUESTIONABLE
b 72% GOOD 0.1 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
2.4 a 77% GOOD 0.0 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
b 67% GOOD 0.05 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
2.5 40% QUESTIONABLE 0.27 POOR QUESTIONABLE

D 3.A 72% GOOD 0.5 AVERAGE ACCEPTABLE

3.B 88% QUESTIONABLE 0.2 POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.C 1 77% GOOD 0.0 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
2 88% QUESTIONABLE 0.0 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.D 41% QUESTIONABLE 0.05 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.E 77% GOOD 0.0 VERY POOR ACCEPTABLE
3.F 83% QUESTIONABLE 0.3 POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.G 40% QUESTIONABLE 0.05 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.H 83% QUESTIONABLE 0.3 POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.I 66% GOOD 0.4 AVERAGE ACCEPTABLE
3.J 41% QUESTIONABLE 0.05 VERY POOR QUESTIONABLE
3.K 27% DIFFICULT 0.1 VERY POOR UNACCEPTABLE

TOTAL NUMBER OF ITEMS : 42

NUMBER OF ACCEPTABLE ITEMS : 23

NUMBER OF QUESTIONABLE ITEMS : 16

NUMBER OF UNACCEPTABLE ITEMS : 03

WHAT IS STATISTICS?

Statistics is the body of mathematical techniques or processes for

gathering, organizing, analyzing, and interpreting numerical data.
Because most research yields quantitative data, statistics is a basic tool of
measurement, evaluation and research.

The word ‘statistics’ is sometimes used to describe the numerical

data that are gathered. Statistical data describe group behavior or group
characteristics abstracted from a number of individual observations that
are combined to make generalizations possible. When we speak of the
age, size or any other characteristics of an ‘average 5th grade learner’, we
are stating a generalized statement of all 5 th grade learners, not any
particular learner. Thus, the statistical measurement is an abstraction that
may be used in place of a great mass of individual measures.

The research worker who uses statistics is concerned with more than
the manipulation of data. The statistical data collection method serves as
the fundamental purpose of description and analysis, and its proper
application involves answering the following questions:
 What facts need to be gathered to provide the information
necessary to test the hypotheses?
 How are these data to be selected, gathered, organized, and
analyzed?
 What assumptions underlie the statistical methodology to be
employed?
 What conclusions can be validly drawn from the analysis of the
data?
Research consists of systematic observation and description of the
characteristics or properties of objects for the purpose of discovering
relationship between variables. The ultimate purpose is to develop
generalizations that may be used to explain phenomena and to predict
future occurrences. To conduct research, we must establish principles so
that the observations and description have a common understood
meaning. Measurement is the most precise and universally accepted
process of description and assigning qualitative values to properties of
objects and events.

The science of statistics has gained an enormous importance and

popularity because of the various functions performed by it. Some of the
functions of statistics are as follows:
 Provide precise and definite numerical outcome of the data
 Simplify large volume and complex data into understandable form
 Helps in making proper comparison
 Framing and testing hypothesis
 Enlarge individual knowledge and experience
 Formulation of policies
 Business forecasting

A proper statistical enquiry is conducted in the following stages:

I. Collection of data
II. Organization and presentation of numerical data
III. Analysis of numerical data
IV. Interpretation of numerical data.
HISTOGRAM
Histogram is one of the most frequently used graphs to
convey statistical data. In this graph, the frequencies are
represented by bars or columns, placed one next to other. Each
column represents the test scores in one of the class intervals of
the frequency distribution.
Unlike bar-graph, histogram is a form of representation
which is used for continuous class intervals for a data set and the
y – axis shows a count of the number of cases ( frequency)
falling in each category. Also, since there are no gaps in
between, consecutive bars or rectangles, the resultant graph
appears like a solid figure. This figure forms a histogram, which
is a graphical representation of a grouped frequency distribution
with continuous classes. Also unlike, a bar graph the width of
the bar plays a significant role in its construction.
Here, in fact, areas of the rectangles, erected are
proportional to the corresponding frequency. However, since the
widths of the rectangles are all equal, the lengths of the
rectangles are proportional to the frequencies.

Histogram
X(Marks) Y(students)
20-25 1
25-30 8
30-35 8
35-40 5
40-45 4
Total 26
FREQUENCY
POLYGON
Frequency polygons are a graphical device for
understanding the shapes of distributions. They serve the
same purpose as histograms, but are especially helpful in
comparing sets of data. Frequency polygons are also a
good choice for displaying cumulative frequency
distributions.
To create a frequency polygon, start just as for
histograms, by choosing a class interval. Then draw an
X-axis representing the values of the scores in your
data. Mark the middle of each class interval with a tick
mark, and label it with the middle value represented by
the class. Draw the Y-axis to indicate the frequency of
each class. Place a point in the middle of each class
interval at the height corresponding to its frequency.
Finally, connect the points. You should include one class
interval below the lowest value in your data and one
above the highest value. The graph will then touch the X-
axis on both sides.
Frequency polygon is useful for comparing distribution. This is achieved by
overlaying the frequency polygons drawn for different data sets.
X(Marks) Y(students) Mid
Point
20-25 1 22.5
25-30 8 27.5
30-35 8 32.5
35-40 5 37.5
40-45 4 42.5
Total 26
MEASURES OF
CENTRAL TENDENCY
ARITHMETIC MEAN

CLASS FREQUENCY MID-VALUE fx

INTERVAL (f) (x)
(marks (no.of students)
secured)

20 – 25 1 22.5 22.5

25 – 30 8 27.5 220

03 – 35 8 32.5 260

35 – 40 5 37.5 187.5

40 – 45 4 42.5 170

Σ f = 26 Σ fx = 860

MEAN ( x ) = Σ fx / Σ f

= 860 / 26

= 33.07
MEDIAN

CLASS MID- TALLY FREQUENCY CUMULATIVE

INTERVAL VALUE (f) FREQUENCY
(x)

20 – 25 22.5 I 1 1

25 – 30 27.5 IIIII III 8 9

30 – 35 32.5 IIIII III 8 17

(MEDIAN
CLASS)
35 – 40 37.5 IIIII 5 22

40 – 45 42.5 IIII 4 26

MEDIAN CLASS = Σ f / 2

= 26 / 2

= 13

MEDIAN = 30 + {(26/2 – 9) / 8} x 5

= 30 + {(13 – 9) / 8} x 5

= 30 + (4 / 8) x 5

= 30 + 2.5
= 32.5
MODE

MODE = 3 MEDIAN – 2 MEAN,

Where,

The MEDIAN value is 32.5

And

The ARITHMETIC MEAN is 33.07

= 3(32.5) – 2(33.07)

= 97.5 – 66.14

= 31.36
STANDARD DEVIATION

CLASS FREQUENCY MID- fx X X2 fX2

(f) VALUE (x – x)
(x)

20 – 25 1 22.5 22.5 -10.57 111.72 111.72

25 – 30 8 27.5 220 -5.57 31.02 248.16

30 – 35 8 32.5 260 -0.57 0.32 2.56

35 – 40 5 37.5 187.5 4.43 19.62 98.2

40 – 45 4 42.5 170 9.43 88.92 355.68

MEAN = 33.07

STANDARD DEVIATION (σ)

= Σ fX2 / Σf

= 816.22 / 26

= 5.60
OVERALL ANALYSIS

WRITING SECTION:

The learners should appreciable ability where they realized that they can
score good marks if they keep to the correct format. However, they have a
long way to go in sentence construction. They also have to do a lot of
reading to improve their vocabulary.

GRAMMAR SECTION:

The learners scored high marks in this section. There improvement in the
usage of the verbs in the grammar section is appreciable. However, it is
quite baffling that they do not make use of that same ability in the
construction of their answers.

LITERATURE SECTION:

The learners scored high marks in this section also. They scored heavily
in the objective section which shows that they were quite thorough with
the text. But in the subjective section, they were quite miserable. They
did not have the ability to answer questions which was based on their
understanding.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. STUART D. SHAW & CYRIL J. WEIR 2007

EXAMINING WRITING NEW DELHI CUP
2. VALETTE REBECCA 1967 MODERN LANGUAGE
TESTING NEW YORK HARCOURT
3. GARRETT HENRY E. 1999 STATISTICS IN
PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION DELHI PARAGON
INTERNATIONAL
4. REA-DICKENS PAULINE & GERMAINE KEVIN
2000 EVALUATION OXFORD OUP
5. HUGHES ARTHUR 2007 TESTING FOR LANGUAGE
TEACHERS CAMBRIDGE CUP
6. WOOLFOLK ANITA 2005 EDUCATIONAL
PSYCHOLOGY DELHI PEARSON EDUCATION