Whether you like language testing or not, you test your students and want to know how they did on your test.
In order to know how your students did, you must look at the typical behavior of your class:
mean, mode, median, midway, mid-course, and midpoint (Stan, 1996).
The mean is basically how upset your students are at you because you made them take a test.
It is believed that (i.e., I think) mode is whether students were awake or asleep during the test.
It may be that (i.e., I wonder if) median is the line separating the students in front who paid attention from the students in back who were busy talking or preparing for another class.
Midway was a famous battle in the South Pacific Ocean that occurred in June, 1942, and
mid-course is the point at which many students give up any hope of learning.
Everyone knows what midpoint means (in other words, I don't know what midpoint means, and I don't care to look it up).
However, these descriptions are not all too brief: more description is better (Templin, 2002).
Research Statement
One purpose of this study is to create something impractical that could never be used in any language classroom in Japan or any other part of the world. Another purpose is to get brownie-points on my resume. So I figured, hey dude – why not create another description for the Central Tendency? Moreover, it is hoped that in creating a new description of this obscure phenomena, my university will promote me to a position that gets me out of grading papers.
Method
Participants
The five subjects in this study were chosen because they were especially suitable for this study. They were Ligonian (an alien race,
from planet Ligon II – a muscular people whose culture resembles a cross between feudal Japan and Sung Dynasty China) tourists visiting Fruit Land,
which is next to my university. They appeared to be a family: two males (father and son) and three females (mother and daughters).
The subjects took a 100-item English test based on items I copied from sum darn TOEFL preparation books. One of the subjects' (the mother)
test scores was selected for this study. The other respondents scores didn't match my expectations, so were ignored.
Instrument
The mother's test score was analyzed using the Templin 1/2k. First, I counted the number of items in the test (symbolized by k). Then, I multiplied the number of items (k) by 1/2. That's all there is to it. Half of the subject's 100 items are 50; therefore, the Templin 1/2k is 50 (Mai, 1999).
Reliability of the Instrument
To determine the reliability of this test, I used an internal-consistency measure, the split-half method. With a pair of scissors (Noblood Stainless-2), I cut the test into two equal parts. I force-fed the top half of the test to my dog, who regurgitated it within .75 seconds. The next day, I force-fed the bottom half of the test to the same dog, and, again, she processed the information in less than one second. So the internal consistency of this test has a fair degree of reliability (i.e., it's unreliable).
[
p. 8
]
Statistical Analysis, Results, & Discussion
I drew the curves and then plotted the data, but displaying the data is beyond the scope of this research – in other words, I don't know what
the heck I've got. Moreover, I'm tired of looking at it.
Fully satisfying the research question is not possible, but the results look as good as can be expected (i.e., they stink).
Future research on the Templin 1/2k is recommended – that is, this article is no good, but neither are many academic publications these days.
References
Anita DeGroin. (2000). The self-centered curriculum. Brooklyn: Brooklyn Bridge University Press.
I. P. Standing. (1998). [Into the wind: Washback effect]. Unpublished raw data.
M. T. Mess. (1975). What the bad language learner can teach us. FEEB-L Quarterly, 0, 9-5.
Mai Laif. (1999). Statistics are true - Don't be misled by the facts. Statistics Daily, 7, 11.
S. A. Templin. (2002). Referencing myself, even though my reference has nothing to do with this study. Ad Nauseum, 25, or 6-4.
Spair D. Rod. (1995). The study of second language inquisition. Salem: Oxcart University Pressed.
Stan Duhrdi Viation. (1996). Testing in languishing programs. Moan, HI: J.D. Fan Club.
Author's Note
I'd like to thank my research assistant, Taro Suchuu Dento, for helping in this project (i.e., he did nearly all the work).
I also wish to thank the anonymous reviewers who could figure out what I was writing about
and explain it to me in a way that I could understand.
Any mistakes in this article are those of my co-author, Audie.
Comments regarding this article should not be addressed to Stephen A. Templin,
Uchuu University, Intergalactic Cultural Studies Division, NCC-1701 Enterprise, Nago-shi, Okinawa, JAPAN 905-0005.
