Conclusions

=Conclusion =

TOEIC, TOEFL and QPT are three very different tests, which test for three very different things, for three very different purposes. Other than the fact that TOEFL and QPT are entrance style exams, and that all three test L2 knowledge in some way or another, there are not many more similarities which can be drawn between them.

Due to the fact that the purpose of each test is so different, it is difficult to assess which test is ‘better.’ For example, even though TOEIC is the more modern, constructivist geared test, QTP is good for initial short-term assessment as it lets teachers quickly know where a student should be placed. In that sense, it is does precisely what it is supposed to do. This goes to show that although standardized tests are limiting, they are good for certain things and perhaps should not be eliminated from testing entirely. The results of a QTP are not definitive and life-altering, as, if you are placed in an incorrect class, that mistake can be easily rectified. TOEFL exams, however, would benefit if they evolved into a more constructivist model, such as the TOEIC test, as they would better assess a student’s ability to complete a university course in a specific field. In other words, it would allow students who hope to be accepted by an English Language tertiary institution to should what they //know// by generating responses, as opposed to what they //don’t know// be merely choosing them off a multiple choice list. For the purposes of an important test such as the TOEFL - perhaps the most important of the three as it has significant implications as concerns the academic and professional future of an individual, and cannot be taken as needed like the TOEIC test – it is important that the test if fair and equal. Unfortunately, standardized test rarely are, and so, many qualified people who could go on to do well in their studies are dismissed without being given a chance.

In conclusion, though traditional assessment methods can sometimes be very useful, it is important that they not be used in irreversible circumstances such as the aforementioned entry into a university. Alternative tests, more holistically represent a learners linguistic abilities but they take time to design properly, need constant updating, and are not as easily marked. However, if an individual’s future is at stake, time should be of no object, and test makers should do their best to ensure that test takers have every opportunity to demonstrate what they can achieve linguistically in a real-life setting.