Job Discussion Forums

Bud Powell · Joined: 11 Jul 2013 Posts: 1736

I have taught writing using a Chinese-produced IELTS book. I have several years experience coaching preparation for the SAT using several American-produced books.

What each book contains are exercises that help students to develop existing skills. The IELTS writing module book that I used presented the students with many prompts that allowed them to develop existing skills that would help them to become better writers. There was nothing to memorize that would make them better writers.

Though I have not worked with other parts of the IELTS , I can only imagine that the other preparation books present prompts that are similar to the various books available for the SAT and the GRe (used for entry into American graduate schools). Memorization is of little to no value on these tests. If there is any similarity between IELTS and the SAT, the only value to be derived from any memorization would be an evaluator working in complicity with the student.

I've taught upper-level oral argumentation. Some students memorized tracts of texts to be used in their thesis and/or rebuttal, but when the exchange required direct confrontation between the two sides of the argument, those who relied upon memorization for their entire strategy were at a loss to rebut anything that the other party(ies) proposed. The difference between this exercise and that of any sort of oral examination for entry into an institution is that in my class, the students knew the subject to be argued ahead of time.

No student should know the prompt for any oral test that is used for entry into a college or university.

My experience with SAT preparation is that it works because the students develop their reading skills, reasoning skills, and math skills, among others through regular practice. From what I have learned from the writing module of the IELTS is that the preparation books and classes are intended to accomplish the same.

The examples presented as what can be memorized in preparation for the IELT suggests to me that the students aren't really ready to take the test. Teaching JUST forms and speculative oral answers to to unknown prompts isn't very good test preparation unless it's included in a review of a much wider trove of skills.

I can see how concentrating on a limited number of oral skills can be helpful if the student and/or coach knows the prospective test-takers' shortcomings.

That's not to say that other parts of the test can't be gamed in some way. Princeton Review test prep book devotes a fair amount of space in its test prep book proposing strategies to help the test-taker to improve his CHANCES of scoring higher on the SAT than he might without using the proposed methods. The same methods could be applied to any non-oral set of responses to written prompts on any test. I just can't see how memorization in preparation for any part of any test (except perhaps mathematics and vocabulary) could be of any measurable help.

spiral78 · Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 11534 Location: On a Short Leash

Like

Sashadroogie · Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 5:57 pm Post subject:

Doubleplusgood!

Bud Powell · Joined: 11 Jul 2013 Posts: 1736

I just wanted to be sure that I understood the terms of the argument. Now I know where everyone is coming from.

It's late and I have a class tomorrow.

Thanks!

Voyeur · Joined: 03 Jul 2012 Posts: 431

This is an extremely complex subject, and people treating it as anything but are doing us all a disservice. IELTS and TOEFL both spend money sponsoring research on their tests. PhDs do studies on the tests. Some studies have been devoted to the effectiveness of memorization. It seems unlikely that such studies would have been made, or that memorization would have become so prevalent, if it had never been of any use in achieving higher scores.
What has become apparent, both in this discussion and in looking at outside research, is that what exactly constitutes memorization--both ethically appropriate and practically effective--is difficult to define. There is a spectrum. Furthermore, I posit that it seems likely there has been an 'arms race' of sorts over the years, which is to say that what may have worked well at one point may not work well today as a result of 'defensive measures' taken by the test makers. And of course the top test prep academies may also have evolved--what we read about as being standard memorization technique may in fact be outdated 'technology', so to speak.
How to memorize when you don't know the prompts? Well, the basic idea is that the oral and written questions revolve around a certain number of repeated topic categories. This is to say that based on past tests, you can break down possible questions into categories such as: people, locations, the environment, triumphing over adversity, honesty, etc...
Now very old school memorization tactics would have you memorize scripted segments for each of these categories and try to work them in. This can be done more artfully than one would think, using lots of memorized structures for transitioning between the fundamental elements of an essay or answer. You can make it relevant if you are good. That being said, this is not impossible to detect. There may be an uneveness to the syntax when going from the scripted material to the less scripted.
But taking a step back from that, many test prep companies still break down the possible prompts into categories as above. They then have students prepare and memorize examples for each of these categories--'example banks' as they are called. Students will then be taught a lot of topic-specific vocabulary for each of these categories--not just basic transitions or introductory statements etc.., but more complex word strings related to that topic such as 'the greenhouse effect is an undeniable scientific fact that...' or somesuch. Student using this approach will step back from completely memorized scripts, however.
It's still unclear to me how effective different types of memorization techniques can be today. That being said, as has been mentioned, all learning involves memorization. So the line between appropriate new vocabulary instruction in preparation for the tests and inappropriately targeted memorization is a difficult one to draw exactly.
What does seem to be clear is that these tests can be prepared for, and that preparation of some kind or another often yields dividends. Even ignoring memorization, the tests have other, non-linguistic elements that can hold back a score, such as deduction, thinking up examples, logically ordering an answer, recognizing patterns. These elements can be taught, but are also affected by innate intelligence. The bottom line is that the tests are not perfect. Someone who prepares for a day and then gets a Band 7 probably has superior raw English ability than someone who prepares for a year and gets a Band 7. The former might have been a potential Band 8, but was held back by non-linguistic factors. The latter is scoring up to the limits of their language ability. From what I have heard, I posit that at least with IELTS, examiners tend to give you an upper bound on the speaking and writing based roughly on your basic English ability (errors, fluency, etc...) but that you can easily underperform that upper bound by failing to be coherent or logical or relevant, etc.
Even if memorization is mostly marketing hype, I believe that the above dynamic can still explain big jumps in scores. That is to say that if you had been held back by the non-linguistic elements, you can quickly rectify that with some prep.

buravirgil · Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 4:53 am Post subject:

RW8677 · Joined: 16 Sep 2014 Posts: 60

Sashadroogie · Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:52 am Post subject:

There is some truth in the claim that newer examiners do not always rate as accurately as they should. Monitoring is an issue. But comparing your assessments of your own recordings with scores given for a different performance, which you do not have access to recordings of, is not the most reliable way of deciding how flawed IELTS is. Yes, there is a margin of error, but it isn't this wide. Not for 20% of test-takers.

Much more likely is that there was some bribery at a higher-up level if these scores were truly undeserved.

Sashadroogie · Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 6:56 am Post subject:

Incidentally, you say you always record your mock exams. Do you have signed written permission from your students to do this? Do they know you'll be replaying the recordings to third parties? Integrity and ethics, after all...

RW8677 · Joined: 16 Sep 2014 Posts: 60

Sashadroogie · Posted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:57 pm Post subject:

No documentation? Really?

Bud Powell · Joined: 11 Jul 2013 Posts: 1736

It's still unclear to me how effective different types of memorization techniques can be today. That being said, as has been mentioned, [b]all learning involves memorization.[/b]

Not so. Memorization is just one method or part of the learning process. It is generally accepted that memorization alone results in short-term retention. What reinforces that retention to become acquisition is application/repetition. Sometimes, the only practical application of learning a certain behavior (e.g. acquiring a list of vocabulary words and their definitions) is repeating the word aloud.

A method that works even better than the above-cited example is the use of flash cards with the learned vocabulary word printed on the front (prompt). When the student is presented with the written word repeatedly and responds with its definition OVER TIME, he is more likely to retain that information.

The ultimate method for learning the list of vocabulary words is to use them regularly in everyday speech and in frequent written application. The repetition of application that causes that behavior to persist.

Tests cited in this discussion are comprehensive. Teaching strategies to help the test taker improve his chance of a higher grade is a good thing.
Teaching a limited skill set to correct or fill a deficiency is a good thing too.

To base preparation for a comprehensive test such as TOEFL, IELT, SAT and GRe solely upon teaching a limited skill set is a bad idea that will produce limited results if the student has not already acquired the skill sets that the test is designed to assess.

The best preparation for a test begins years before it is taken.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.