IELTS Research Reports

Anthony Green and Roger HawkeyOn the matching task:■■■■potential overlap was identified across the source statements leading to some ambiguity inthe pairings; modifications were suggested accordingly.use in the items of the same word(s) as in the text could give away some answers; IELTSorientedtextbooks tend to teach for parallel meanings.On the summary completion task:■■there was some confusion over the difference, if any, between ‘passage’ and ‘text’.■■■■it was clarified that the (not more than three) completing words had to actually appear inthe original text but some doubt remained over whether a different form of the same wordwas eligible for use.the summary completion passage was modified to allow for this.On the multiple choice task:■■■■■■instances of more than one item choice being acceptable because of semantic overlap e.g.respect and love, were discussed.the discussion here raised a multiple choice task issue of whether all alternatives should besimilar in function, e.g. all four about facts or all four inferences, or whether alternatives canbe mixed in terms of function, presence or absence in the text (as in a true / false / not givenitem) etc? do candidates know such IELTS rules or conventions? in such cases, the testdesigner has the option of changing the item or changing the distractors.the test item-writing and editing process here is described by Mary as ‘finding the areaand going over it with a fine-tooth comb’.It emerged during the editing session that as a part of the editing process both Mary and Victoria hadasked friends to take their tests as a check on whether these were successful. Both writers had foundthis helpful in guiding further improvements.This part of the session ended after 40 minutes’ discussion of the items.6.1.1 Choosing the Text for the examThe initial choices among the three non-experienced item-writers were as follows:Mary favoured Mathilda’s Sustainable Cities text, finding:■■the robot text (her own) lacked ‘meat’■■the dreams text was ‘too hard’ (for her)■■the cities text, being descriptive, was more easily exploited for items and distractors■■Mathilda favoured Mary’s Robots text, finding:■■■■it contained enough meat in the opinions expressed, the tensions described, the hurdlespresented.it was at an appropriate level of difficulty, yet was reader-friendly.Mathilda now considered her own sustainable cities text:■■too fact-based and argument free.■■lacking the challenge or need for deeper understanding of an argumentative text.310 www.ielts.org