The paper test was about 10 pages long. I was pleased when I could answer the first question! And the second! Things went pretty well for the rest of that page and a few questions on the next. After that I pretty much had to quit. But I felt ok - I could demonstrate the little bit of knowledge I had.
My interviewer smiled a lot and seemed interested in me. She adjusted her speaking level to meet mine so that I could show what I knew. Just as in the written test, I could answer a few basic questions and then I had reached my limit. Test was over.
A couple of observations:
- The test was administered by the directors and teachers of the school. Almost certainly it was a local test written by the school professionals. Since answers were hand-written directly on the test paper, it was clear each test would be read and scored by a teacher. Then there was the oral interview with a teacher. Thus teachers were completely and personally involved in evaluating student ability and getting students placed in the right class. The benefit of this teacher involvement seems logical and obvious, and inspires confidence.
- The interview did so much more than allow the teacher to evaluate speaking ability. It gave me a chance to meet a teacher, to ask questions. It made me feel the instructor's interest in me personally and her desire to ensure I was in the right class. It certainly showed much more about my ability than the written test alone would do, and again inspired confidence.
So - no fancy computer test, no pre-recorded listening test, no essay. I don't know if there are concerns with validation, unbiased questions, and all the things we struggle with at SJCC. My feeling, as a student, is that those things don't matter much. What mattered to me was how I was greeted and treated as as I went through the placement process and how confident I felt that the process could accurately assess my language ability. Not really complicated.







