Abstract:
This study focused on issues in the language used in instructions in the A/L General English examination.
It attempted to identify the extent to which language issues occur in test-item-instructions and the degree
to which these test-item-instructions adhere to the CLT theories. The format of the examination and
instructions have remained the same over the years. For primary data, past papers between 2008 and 2016
and course-book vocabulary were analysed, while questionnaires were administered to stakeholder groups
for opinions/attitudes. Secondary data were obtained from the Department of Education. Instructions were
analysed through grammar and mechanics of English language. The issues were identified as, ambiguous
instructions, grammar, confusing/literary language, punctuation/mechanics, vocabulary,
complexity/difficultly and ethicality. Part A of both papers, carrying an average 33% marks contained
form-focused instructions. The five factors needed for a communicative test (Rea Dickins, 1991) seemed
compromised due to grammatically-explicit information which reduce communicative-purpose. Eight
test-item-types revealed that most issues were in the use of vocabulary, grammar, language and
expressions, while some instructions were ambiguous due to complex grammatical structures. Words
tested extra to the text-book were increasing over the years and vocabulary-related issues were 13% of the
total. Vocabulary-testing items were not aligned with the recommended CA theoretical norms, although
they carried around 35% of the marks. Thus, by analysing approximately 160 test-items, the study found
that use of language caused 64% of the issues. The GE examination was primarily testing students for
grammatical form rather than meaning. For example, they use unitary sentences instead of the contextbased
ones. The study concluded that language-related issues occurred to a considerably high degree and
to a significant extent, instructions were not based on CA norms. The recommendations are to better align
the test with CLT norms, rather than reproducing old formats, by using contextual and integrative tests
able to evaluate a variety of knowledge/competencies simultaneously.
