A Construct Validation of the Malaysian University English Test and the English Placement Test: Two High-stakes English Language Proficiency Tests

Authors

  • Noor Lide Abu Kassim International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia
  • Ainol Zubairi International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia
  • Nuraihan Mat Daud International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2007.4.1

Abstract

Malaysian students are normally required to show a certain level of English language proficiency before they are offered a place by a local institution of higher learning. One of the examinations conducted to ascertain their level of proficiency is the Malaysian University English Test (MUET). Apart from MUET some universities also conduct their own test for the same reason. This paper discusses a study on the comparability of MUET with the English Placement Test (EPT) conducted by the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). This study was conducted to see whether the two tests could be used interchangeably for admission and placement purposes. The two tests were administered on second year pre university students of IIUM. Analyses show that though significant, the correlation coefficients of the two tests were not high enough for them to be used interchangeably.

 

References

Alderson, J. C., & Banerjee, J. (2002). Language testing and assessment (Part 2). Language Teaching, 35,79-113.

Alderson, J. C., Clapham, C. & Wall, D. (1995). Language Test Construction and Evalyation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

American Psychological Association. (1985). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington D.C.: Author. pe MJLIVOL. 4 (2007) www.mjli.uum.edu.my

Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. FE, Davidson, F, Ryan, K. & Choi, I. C. (1995). An Investigation into the Comparability of Two Tests of English as a Foreign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bachman, L. F, Kunnan, A., Vinniarajan, S., & Lynch, B. (1988). Task and ability analysis as a basis for examining content and construct comparability in two EFL proficiency test batteries. Language Testing, 5(2), 128-159.

Bae, J. & Bachman, L. F. (1998). A latent variable approach to listening and reading: testing factorial invariance across two groups of children in the Korean/ English two-way immersion irogram. Language Testing, 15(3), 380-414.

Buck, G. (1992). Listening comprehension: Construct validity and trait characteristics. Language Learning, 42(3), 313-357.

Criper, C. & Davies, A. (1988). English Language Testing Services ELTS Validation Project Report, Research Report 1. British Council Local Examination Syndicate /University of Edinburgh.

Cumming, A. (1996). The concept of validation in language testing, in Cumming, A. & Berwick, R. (eds.), Validation in Language Testing. Clevedon: USA: Multilingual Matters.

Freedle, R,. & Kostin, I. (1994). Can multiple choice reading comprehension test be construct valid? Psycholggical Science, 5, 107-110.

Freedle, R,. & Kostin, I. (1999). Does text matter in multiple-choice test of comprehension? The case for the construct validity of TOEFL minitalks. Language Testing, 6(1), 2-32.

Gorsuch, R.L.(1983). Factor analysis (2 ed.). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gray, T. B. (1997). Controversies regarding the nature of score validity: still crazy after all these years. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of The Southwest Educational Research Association, Austin, January 1997, available at http://cricae.net/ft/tamu/valid.htm

Gronlund, N. E. (1981). Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching. New York.: MacMillan.

Henning, G. (1987). A Guide to Language Testing-Development, Evaluation, Research. London: Newbury House.

Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University. Press.

MJLI VOL. 4 (2007) www.mjli.uum.edu.my

Kunnan, A. J. (1995). Test Taker Characteristics and Test Performance: A structural modelling approach. (Studies in Language Testing Series, vol 2). Cambridge: University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate /Cambridge University Press.

Messick, S. (1989a). Meaning and values in test validation: the science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5-11.

Messick, S. (1989b). Validity, in Linn R.L (ed.), Educational Measurement. New York: McMillan, pp 13-103.

Pett, M.A., Lackey, N.R., & Sullivan, J.J. (2003). Making Sense of Factor Analysis. The Use of Factor Analysis for Instrument Development in Health Care Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stapleton, C.D. (1997). Basic concepts and procedures of confirmatory factor analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, Austin, January 1997. Retrieved November 1, 2004 from http://cricae.net/ £t/tamu/Cfa.htm

MILI VOL. 4 (2007)

Downloads

Published

31-01-2007

Issue

Vol. 4 (2007): Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction (MJLI) Vol. 4, 2007

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Abu Kassim, N. L., Zubairi, A., & Mat Daud, N. (2007). A Construct Validation of the Malaysian University English Test and the English Placement Test: Two High-stakes English Language Proficiency Tests. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 4, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2007.4.1

Research impact

Harvested 2026-09-09
0 citations recorded so far

Counts differ between services because each indexes a different body of literature. None of them is the whole picture.

Identifiers DOI 10.32890/mjli2007.4.1 OpenAlex W146119761 Semantic Scholar CorpusID 107956171