In a similar vein, Administrator A1 had the following account:
Excerpt 77
No matter we use the GEPT test or the graduation benchmark as a goal, when it is used as a yardstick or for management, there would be a clearer direction for us to follow. So I think this policy has had some influence on teachers, but the influence, from the school management point of view, would be positive.
(Administrator A1)
He further explained what he meant by “the school management point of view”:
Excerpt 78
Why did I say that setting a graduation benchmark or a goal is helpful for evaluating the sense of achievement? Because, if there were no extra external force to push this part (students’ English proficiency), I believe English teachers in the vocational higher education would have great difficulties in teaching.
When our students get into college, it is unlikely to push them to make up the five or six years’ delay in English learning simply by a few credit hours in
college. (Administrator A1)
Both Administrator B1 and Administrator A1 pointed out one benefit of using the GEPT test—quantification of students’ achievement in English, which they thought was important for the purpose of school management and might even help teachers’
teaching in a sense.
Obviously, the administrators seemed to be positive and optimistic about the effect of the GEPT test as the graduation benchmark, somewhat consistent with Brown’s (2008) observation that administrators’ “norm-referenced perspective” tends to keep themselves focused on program-level testing and program evaluation.
Teachers: The GEPT used as an incentive for learning
Teachers, on the other hand, have “criterion-referenced perspective” which,
according to Brown, tends to keep themselves interested in objectives setting, course-level testing, materials development, and delivery of instruction. Supporting evidence could be found in the interview data with some teachers especially with Teacher B1:
Excerpt 79
When the evaluation committee or the MOE officials come to our school, what do they want to see? Is our English education good or bad? Yes, good, because students are interested in learning English, but you don’t have any hard evidence for that. Is our English education good or bad? Yes, good, because students have made some progress, but, again, you can’t prove it. So, they can examine only students’ GEPT-taking records. The MOE is the instigator of this situation. They have misled the English education in Taiwan actually. (Teacher B1) Similar complaints about the MOE’s policy were also heard in Teacher A5’s interview:
Excerpt 80
In fact, this graduation benchmark policy was set to fulfill the MOE’s requirement. However, when the MOE first brought up the issue that all schools should set their own English benchmark for graduation, they did not seem to have a comprehensive plan. (Teacher A5) However, Teacher A5 tried to find a balance between teachers’ basic concerns and the MOE’s requirements. She said:
Excerpt 81
But I don’t think I will be too pessimistic. I think now that we have the benchmark for students, we should still encourage them to go for it. It’s like finding a balance between two extremes, like how we can help them improve their English, and also increase, even very slowly, their scores on the GEPT test.
(Teacher A5)
Teacher A5, like many other teachers and unlike the administrators, did not believe in the effect of the exit test on improving students’ English proficiency, but still hoped that students could benefit from it anyway. Her view somewhat echoes Davies’ (1990) view that it would be eventually futile for teachers to attempt to avoid teaching to some high-sakes curriculum-free tests, since washback is so wide-spread.
Davies suggests that teachers accept the real-world situation and make the test as beneficial as possible to transform its impact on teaching and learning.
Perhaps Teacher B3 voiced most of the teachers’ hope in this regard:
Excerpt 82
The main purpose of setting a graduation benchmark is to force students to improve their English. However, I think, if they want to improve their English within the four years in college, they need to be strongly autonomous and self-directed. (Teacher B3)
The interview data with the administrators and teachers at both schools seem to be congruent with Brown’s observation that administrators and teachers have different views on testing. The former, on one hand, believe in the effects of testing on managing teaching and learning; the latter, on the other hand, had doubts about such manipulation. However, from the practical point of view, both sides seemed to agree on the implementation of a “backdoor” for students, suggesting that an unsuccessful attempt was actually foreseeable. The salvation of all the complicated feelings tangling here might be the unanimous presumption among most teachers and administrators that, for students, the process of making effort to learn English is actually more important than the result itself, as concluded by Administrator B3:
Excerpt 83
First of all, the policy itself will create an important atmosphere for learning English. It reminds students that it’s time to study English, especially if they did not take it seriously before.
Second, even though students might not be able to pass the benchmark within a short time, they can still keep on learning, as long as they go to take these classes, which is a good thing for them. In the vocational high school, many students were left unsupported, but now they know they can get help with their English here in college. If they are willing to be helped, then they could still build up their English ability gradually.
Third, for those students whose English is really bad and are scared to death by the graduation benchmark, I think the most difficult part for them is to remove the shadows in their minds….If they could overcome their psychological problems, I see no reason why they could not pass the benchmark after spending four years with us. But now we have to face the reality that some students just could not escape from their psychological confinement, so we let them take the make-up course instead. (Administrator B3)
What, then, did students think of the intention behind the graduation benchmark policy?