86 I

บทคดยอแบบทดสอบสมทธภาพทางภาษาองกฤษของมหาวทยาลยเทคโนโลยพระจอมเกลาพระนครเหนอ หรอ แบบทดสอบ

K-StEPเปนแบบทดสอบสมทธภาพทางภาษาองกฤษจดท�าโดยภาควชาภาษาคณะศลปศาสตรประยกตมหาวทยาลยเทคโนโลยพระจอมเกลาพระนครเหนอเพอใชวดสมทธภาพทางภาษาองกฤษของนกศกษาทงระดบปรญญาตรและระดบบณฑตศกษางานวจยนมวตถประสงคเพอพฒนาแบบทดสอบมาตรฐานสมทธภาพทางภาษาองกฤษโดยอางองจากกรอบมาตรฐานความสามารถภาษาของประเทศในกลมสหภาพยโรป(CEFR)และเพอเทยบหาความสมพนธระหวางผลคะแนนแบบทดสอบK-StEPกบแบบทดสอบTOEICโดยมขนตอนการด�าเนนการวจยเรมจากการสรางแบบทดสอบK-StEPและประเมนขอสอบ100ขอตามลกษณะเฉพาะของขอสอบ โดยคณาจารยผมประสบการณในการสอนภาษาองกฤษ ขอสอบทไดรบการประเมนเพอหาความเทยงตรงโดยผเชยวชาญจ�านวน 5 คน ไดน�าไปทดลองเพอหาคาความเชอมนกบนกศกษาจ�านวน 178 คน ในสวนการหาคาความสมพนธระหวางคะแนนแบบทดสอบนนนกศกษาอาสาสมครจ�านวน105 คนไดท�าแบบทดสอบK-StEP กบแบบทดสอบ TOEIC ผลการวจยสรปไดวาผลคะแนนของแบบทดสอบ K-StEP กบแบบทดสอบ TOEIC มความสมพนธเชงบวกอยางมาก(PearsonCorrelation=.877)ผลของการวเคราะหแบบการถดถอยเชงเสนอยางงายแสดงวาผลคะแนนแบบทดสอบK-StEP สามารถใชท�านายผลของคะแนน TOEIC ได (R-coefficient = .877) นอกจากนนผลการวจยสามารถใชในการเปรยบเทยบคะแนนทไดจากแบบทดสอบK-StEPกบแบบทดสอบTOEIC เพอใชอธบายความสามารถทางภาษาองกฤษของผเขาสอบขอสอบทง2ชนดดงกลาวได

ค�ำส�ำคญ : แบบทดสอบสมทธภาพทางภาษาองกฤษการเทยบผลคะแนนแบบทดสอบK-StEPแบบทดสอบTOEIC

กำรเทยบผลคะแนนแบบทดสอบK-StEPกบแบบทดสอบTOEICโดยอำงองจำกกรอบมำตรฐำนควำมสำมำรถทำงภำษำ

ของประเทศในกลมสหภำพยโรป(CEFR)

งำมทพยวมลเกษม1

ทวำพรคงสม2

สภำลกษณนครศร2

พงษพฒนพนธนะหรญ3

ธนยพรแสงวรช3

ฌลลกำมหำพนทอง3

กรกฎก�ำแกว3

2 ผนพนธประสานงานโทรศพท081-8428661อเมล:tkongsom@hotmail.com วลยกรเจรญสข3

รบเมอ21มกราคม2563ตอบรบเมอ8มถนายน2563 DOI:10.14416/j.faa.2020.25.008 พรสวรรคศภศร3

1 ผชวยศาสตราจารยดร.ขาราชการบ�านาญมหาวทยาลยเทคโนโลยพระจอมเกลาพระนครเหนอ2 ผชวยศาสตราจารยดร.ประจ�าภาควชาภาษาคณะศลปศาสตรประยกตมหาวทยาลยเทคโนโลยพระจอมเกลาพระนครเหนอ3 อาจารยประจ�าภาควชาภาษาคณะศลปศาสตรประยกตมหาวทยาลยเทคโนโลยพระจอมเกลาพระนครเหนอ

1 EmeritusAssistantProfessorDr.,DepartmentofLanguages,FacultyofAppliedArts,KingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkok2 AssistantProfessorDr.,DepartmentofLanguages,FacultyofAppliedArts,KingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkok3 Lecturer,DepartmentofLanguages,FacultyofAppliedArts,KingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkok

I 87

Abstract TheKingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkokStandardizedEnglishProficiencyTestorK-StEPTestisanEnglishproficiencytestcreatedbytheDepartmentofLanguages,FacultyofAppliedArts,KingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkok(KMUTNB).ThetestassessestheEnglishproficiencyofKMUTNBundergraduateandgraduatestudents.ThestudyaimstodevelopanorganizedstandardEnglishproficiencytestbasedontheCommonEuropeanFrameworkofReference(CEFR)forLanguagesandtofindacorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores.Inthestudy,severalprocedureswereimplementedtostrengthenvalidityandreliability.AteamofexperiencedEnglishlecturersjoinedthetestdevelopmentprocessandhelpedtovalidate100itemsoftheK-StEPTestbasedonthetestspecifications.Thetestwasvalidatedby5expertswhilereliabilitywasgainedfromthepilotstudywith178students.Inordertoexplorethecorrelation,105volunteerstudentsparticipatedinundertakingtheK-StEPTestandtheTOEICTest.ThefindingsrevealedahighlypositivecorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoresat .877byPearsonCorrelation.TheresultsoftheSimpleRegressionAnalysis revealedhighequatingvaliditybetweenthetwotests(R-coefficient=.877).Moreover,theresultscanbeusedtocomparethetestscoresofthetwotestsanddefinetheEnglishabilityofthetesttakers.

Keywords : Englishproficiencytest,Mappingscores,K-StEPTest,TOEICTest

Mapping the K-StEP Test Scores to the TOEIC Test Scores Based onthe Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)

NgamthipWimolkasem1 TiwapornKongsom2

SupalakNakhornsri2

PongpatPantanahiran3

ThanyapornSangwirach3 ChallikaMahaphuntong3

KorakotKamkaew3

2 CorrespondingAuthor,Tel.081-8428661,E-mail:tkongsom@hotmail.com ValaikornCharoensuk3

Received21January2020;Accepted8June2020 PonsawanSuphasri3

88 I

1.Introduction There are several reasonswhy there hasbeen an urgent need to enhance the Englishproficiency of Thai students. Firstly, the Englishlanguageistheglobaltoolforcommunicationandforacademicstudy.Itistheprimarylanguageusedwhensearchingforknowledge,forcommunicationamongst countries, and global business, andinternationalrelations.Secondly,duetotherapidchangeinnewtechnology,Englishisneededasamedium to transfer the knowledge to theimplementationprocess.Thirdly,ThaistudentshavearelativelylowlevelofEnglishlanguageproficiency.

AccordingtotheEnglishProficiencyIndexbasedontheEnglishtestscoresof1.7milliontesttakersin88countries,Thailandisranked64thwithanaveragescore of 48.54% defined as low proficiency(EducationFirst,2018).Othercountries inASEAN,faredmuchbetter,forexample,Singaporeisranked3rd (68.63%), Philippines is ranked 14th (61.84%),Vietnam is ranked41st (53.12%),and Indonesia isranked51st(51.88%).Moreover,theresultsoftheOrdinaryNationalEducationTest(O-NET)inEnglishin2017wereverydisappointingwithanaverageEnglishlanguagescoreof28.31%asshowninTable1below.

Table1 O-NETscoresofMattayom6studentsin2016and2017(NationalInstituteofEducationTesting Services,2018)

Subjects Year2016 Year2017

Thais 52.29 49.25

Socialstudies 35.89 34.70

Sciences 31.61 29.37

English 27.76 28.31

Mathematics 24.88 24.53

In2016,theOfficeoftheHigherEducationCommission(OHEC)decidedonapolicytoraisethelevels of English proficiency of Thai students inhigher education. Themain objective was thatEnglishshouldequipstudents tosearch fornewknowledge,tokeepupwiththerapidglobalchange,tosupporttheASEANEconomicCommunity(AEC),andtoencouragethecountry’scompetitiveness.Thepolicyincluded5missionstatementsasfollows: 1. TheuniversitymustdefinethepolicyandsettargetsinelevatingtheEnglishproficiencylevelateveryeducationallevel.Thiswillbetheguidelineindevelopingthestudentsandgraduates’readinessinbothacademicandprofessionalfields.

2. Theuniversitymusthaveadefiniteplanto follow by setting an indicator for Englishproficiencyassessment. 3. TheuniversitymusttakeactiontoimprovethelearningandteachingprocessinEnglishtoreachtherequiredtargets. 4. The universitymust provide activities,materials,media instruction,andenvironment tomotivatestudents’self-developmentandawarenessinusingEnglish. 5. The university should assess everystudent’sEnglishproficiency leveleither throughin-houseassessmentorbyuseofastandardEnglishproficiencytestbymappingwiththelevelsofthe

I 89

CommonEuropeanFrameworkofReference(CEFR)for Languages. This can provide information ofindividualstudentEnglishproficiency.TheEnglishproficiencycertificatecanbeattachedtoorbepartof the academic transcript starting from theacademicyear2019.

To enhance the English abilities of Thaistudentstoenablethemtoperformefficientlyandeffectively in English, the implementationof theCommonEuropeanFrameworkofReference(CEFR)forLanguageshasbeenusedasastandardtoolandset the target at all levels of education by theMinistryofEducationaspresentedinTable2.

Table2 CEFRtargetlevelbytheMinistryofEducation(OfficeoftheBasicEducationCommission,2018)

Levelofeducation CEFRlevel

Primarylevel(Prathom1-6) A1

Secondarylevel(Mattayom1-3) A2

HighSchoollevel(Mattayom4-6) B1

BachelorDegreelevel B2

To summarize, educational policy hasbrought about changes in the teaching, learning,and testing of English in Thailand. Although theNationalEducationActiswell-meaninginitsgoalsaimingatimprovingThais’Englishskillsinreality,itfails to achieve the goal as can be seen in thedisappointing results of the National Exam andThailand’spoorrankinginEnglishproficiency. Language testing is an integrated andnecessarypartofanylanguageprogram.Itisacrucialtool for language proficiency assessment forlearners’ advancement and program evaluation(Norris,2006).RegardingraisingstandardsandgoalsinEnglishproficiency,severalThaiuniversitieshavedevelopedtheirownstandardsofEnglishtesting,examplesbeingtheChulalongkornUniversityTestofEnglishProficiency(CU-TEP),andtheThammasatUniversity General English Test (TU-GET). KingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkokhasalsodevelopedanEnglishproficiencytestbasedonperformanceandCEFRnamelyKingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkokStandardizedEnglishProficiencyTest(K-StEPTest)andhasusedthetestfordecades.TheK-StEPTestwasoriginally

adoptedtoevaluatetheEnglishproficiencyofKingMongkut’sUniversityofTechnologyNorthBangkok(hereaftercalledKMUTNB)graduatestudents.Ithasbeengraduallyaccepteduniversity-wideateverylevelfrombachelordegreetograduatelevelandasthecriteriaforuniversitypersonalrecruitment.In response to the high demand for a standardEnglish proficiency exam for various purposesincluding admission, certification, and exitexamination,itwasnecessarytoelevatetheK-StEPTestasanationalstandardEnglishtestbyfindingitscorrelationwitharenownedEnglishglobaltest.TheTestofEnglishforInternationalCommunication(TOEICTest)hasbeenselectedforthecorrelationofthisstudybecauseitcanbeusedworldwideasareferenceforjobrecruitmentandpromotionaswellasacademicpurposes.Inaddition,thecurrentstudyaimedtofindthepredictivevalidityoftheK-StEP Test scores and the TOEIC Test scoresbecausethepredictivevaliditycanrevealtheextenttowhichthetestcanpredictsomefutureordesiredoutcome.Therefore,iftesttakersknowtheirK-StEPTestscores,itispossiblethattheywillknowtheirTOEIC Test scores. In order to find the specific

90 I

meanings to describewhat the test takers can doafter they know their K-StEPTest scores andTOEICTestscores,theabilitybandsordescriptorsofCEFR levelswereused to identify theEnglishabilityofthetesttakersoftheK-StEPTestandtheTOEICTestateachlevel.ThedescriptorsofCEFRlevels were commonly used because they areinternationally recognized as the commonframework of language use to raise standards inmanystandardEnglishproficiencytests. Basedontheproblemsandtherequirementsabove,thisstudyhasbeendesignedtodevelopanorganizedstandardEnglishproficiencytestbasedontheCommonEuropeanFrameworkofReference(CEFR)descriptorsnamelytheK-StEPTest,andthentofindthe relationshipbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores. 1.1 Objectivesofthestudy 1.1.1 To develop an organized standardEnglish proficiency test based on the CommonEuropean Framework of Reference (CEFR) forLanguagesandtofindthecorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores. 1.1.2 ToexaminewhethertheK-StEPTestscorescanpredicttheTOEICTestscores. 1.1.3 TofindtheabilitybandsfordefiningEnglishproficiencyobtainedfromtheK-StEPTestscores. 1.2 Researchquestions 1.2.1WhataretheconcurrentvalidityvaluesoftheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores? 1.2.2 Towhat extent can the K-StEP TestscorespredicttheTOEICTestscores? 1.2.3What are the ability bands fordescribingEnglishlevelsobtainedfromtheK-StEPTestscores? 1.3 Researchhypothesis Hypothesis1:ThereisasignificantrelationshipbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoresatthe.05level.(H1:rxy≠0).

Hypothesis 2: The K-StEP Test scores cansignificantlypredicttheTOEICTestscoresatthe.05level.(H2:B≠0).

2.ReviewofRelatedLiterature Thereviewofliteratureandrelatedstudiesisprovidedtoexaminethetheoriesunderlyingthisstudy. 2.1 TheCouncilofEuropeFrameworkofReferenceandLanguageEducation The Council of Europe Framework ofReference and Language Education is anintergovernmental cooperation in the area oflanguagesandeducationundertheLanguagePolicyDivisionoftheCouncilofEurope.ItwasformallycalledtheModernLanguagesSectionthatcanbetracedbackforalmost5decades(Martyniuk,2010).TheCouncilofEuropewasfoundedin1949with10members as one of themeasures after theSecond World War to increase internationalunderstandingandavoidfuturewar.With47statememberstoday,theCouncilofEuropeisresponsiblefortheEuropeancourtofjusticeandcontinuestoconcernitselfwiththepromotionofinternationalunderstanding through the learningof languages,history,andcultureofothercountries(North,2014). The Council of Europe’s Language PolicyDivisioninStrasbourgiscurrentlyconcernedwiththe languages of education particularlywith theintegrationofmigrantsandtheirchildren.TheaimsoftheCouncilofEurope’sLanguagePolicyaretoachievegreaterunityamong itsmembersandtopursuethisaimbyadoptingcommonactioninthefields of culture, education, and social sciences(CouncilofEurope,2020). The Common European Framework ofReference(CEFR)forLanguagesalsoprovidesabasisfortheelaborationoflanguagesyllabi,curriculumguidelines, examinations, textbooks, etc. as it isdivided into6 levels and3bands:A1-A2 (BasicUser),B1-B2(IndependentUser),C1-C2(Proficient

I 91

User).Thedescriptorsofeachlevelaredescribedinaverycomprehensivewaywhatlanguagelearnershavetolearnandtodoinordertouselanguageforcommunication.Moreover,theknowledgeandlanguage skills should be developed to practicecommunicationineachlevel.Thedescriptionalsocovers the cultural context aswell as linguisticscompetence. Since the descriptors of CEFR candefinelevelsofproficiencywhichallowslearners’progresstobemeasuredateachstageoflearning,anumberofstandardEnglishproficiencytestsi.e.TOEFL,IELTS,TOEICandAPTIShavemappedtheirtests’minimumscorescorrespondingtothesixCEFRlevelsoflanguageproficiency(A1-C2). 2.2 StudiesonmappingtheteststotheCommon European Framework of Reference(CEFR)

TannenbaumandWylie(2015)conductedastudytoprovideacutscoreoftheTOEICTestbasedonCEFRdescriptors.ThepurposeofthisstudywastorecommendminimumscoresforeachCEFRlevelthatcorrespondstotheTOEICTestinordertosetacertaincategory.Thepanelconsistedof22expertsthatwereEnglishlanguageinstructors,administrators,or directors of language programs and languagetestingfrom10differentEuropeancountries.Theywereaskedtorecommendthecutscoreforeachofthe6CEFRlevels. Itwaspossiblethatnotallexpertswouldmakethesamedecisionastothecutscore.Therefore,acriterionofatleast67%or2/3of the22expertswas theagreed level.Thetablebelowpresentstheresultsoftherecommendedminimum score for each test at each CEFRproficiencylevel.

Table3 CutscoreforeachskillofTOEICTestcomparedtoCEFRlevels(TannenbaumandWylie,2015)

Test/TestSection

TotalScore MinimumScore

ScaleRange A1 A2 B1 B2 C1

TOEIC @ListeningandReadingTotal1

TOEIC @Listening 5-495 60 110 275 400 490

TOEIC @Reading 5-495 60 115 275 385 4554

TOEIC @SpeakingandWriting2

TOEIC @Speaking 0-200 50 90 120 160 1805

TOEIC @Writing 0-200 30 70 120 150 1805

TOEICBridgeTM3

TOEICBridgeTMListening 10-90 46 64 84

TOEICBridgeTMReading 10-90 46 70 86

1 TOEIC @ListeningandReadingscoresarereportedin5-pointincrements.2 TOEIC @SpeakingandWritingscoresarereportedin10-pointincrements.Nototalscoreisreported.3 TOEIC BridgeTMscoresarereportedin2-pointincrements.Nototalscoreisreported.4 TOEIC @ ReadingC1minimumscoreisbasedon45percentofthepanelists.5 TOEIC @SpeakingandWritingscoreswereadjustedfromtherecommendedstudyvalues.

92 I

In2017,agroupofEnglishexpertsinThailanddeveloped the10 level-frameworkofEnglish forThailandbasedon theCEFR (Hiranburana et al.,2017). The study involved 2main parts, i.e. thedrawing of the descriptors of the Framework ofReference for English Language Education inThailand (FRELE-TH) and thepublic hearing. ThediscussionfocusedontheuseoftheframeworkforacademicandprofessionalqualificationinThailand.Thestudyemployedaqualitativeanddescriptiveresearch,basedontheanalysisandadaptationoftheCEFR.TheresultsareverypracticalandusefulforEnglishteacherstoemployoradaptforbothcurriculumdevelopmentandtestconstructionbyoffering two -scale types to describe Englishproficiencylevels,i.e.globalandillustrativescales.The global scales include an overview of thelanguage proficiency at all levels while theillustrative scales comprise three aspects:communicativeactivities,communicationstrategies,and communicative language competence. Inaddition,theFRELE-THincludesthesamestructuresandcomponentsoftheCEFR,whichofferlanguagefunctions, discoursemarkers, topics, vocabularyrange,grammar,microskillsandwordfamilylist.TheFRELE-THisdividedinto10levelsand3bands:A1,A1+,A2,andA2+(BasicUser),B1,B1+,B2,andB2+(IndependentUser),C1-C2(ProficientUser).Allthe10levelspresent“cando”descriptorstodefinetheactualuseofEnglishincommunication.Apartfromtheacademicpurpose,theframeworkcanalsobeusedasareferenceforjobrecruitmentandjobpromotion. 2.3 Studiesonthecomparisonbetweenother English proficiency test scores and theTOEICTestscores Hirai(2008)conductedastudytofindthetest scorecorrelationbetween theSTEPBULATSwritingandtheTOEICTestscores.Theparticipantswere559JapanesebusinesspeoplethattookboththeSTEPBULATSWritingTestandtheTOEICTest

betweenSeptember2004andDecember2007.Theresults showed the STEP BULATSwriting scorescorrelatedmoderatelywiththeTOEICTestscores,with a correlation coefficient of .69 for all scorerange.While the correlation coefficient for theupper-levelgroupofparticipantswithTOEICscoresof800andabovewasat.46,50.4%ofthe349testtakersthattooktheSTEPBULATSWritingTestfailedto perform the business English writing skillsexpectedofcompetentinternationalbusinesspeople.ThestudythensuggestedthattherelativelylowperformanceandscoresintheSTEPBULATSWritingTestwereprimarilybecauseof thedeficiencyofexposuretobusinesspracticeandvocabulary. InThailand,severalstudiesconductedthecomparisonstudiesontheirEnglishproficiencytestsandtheTOEICTest.Anuyahongsa(2015)conducteda study to compare the efficiency between theThai-NichiInstituteofTechnology(TNI)EnglishAbilityTestandtheTOEICTest.Theparticipantswere20TNIundergraduatestudents.Thestratifiedrandomsampling technique was used to select theparticipantsthatenrolledinreadingandwritingskillsinEnglish1course.ThedatawerecollectedbytheTNIEnglishabilitytest,100itemsforlisteningskilland100itemsforreadingskill,andtheTOEICTest.Meanscores,standarddeviation,t-test,andPearsonCorrelationwereusedtoanalyzethecollecteddata.The findings showed that the undergraduatestudents’ competence in taking the TNI Englishability testand theTOEICTestwasatmoderatelevel.ThefindingsalsoshowedthatthetestscoresofbothTNIEnglishabilitytestandTOEICTestwerecloselyrelatedandtheefficiencyoftheTNIEnglishabilitytestwasrelatedtothatoftheTOEICTest.Inaddition,thecorrelationbetweenbothtestswasatveryhighlevel(.992). Chanchusakun et al. (2017) conducted acomparisonstudyonthequalityofequatingEnglishscoresbetweentheSEPTandtheTOEICTest.Thesample of this study included 40 students that

I 93

studied inbachelorofbusinessadministration inhotel management, Silapakorn UniversityInternational College. The research instrumentsused in the studywere the Silapakorn EnglishProficiency Test (SEPT) and the TOEIC Test. Thefindings of equating with regression methodrevealedthatthescoreoftheTOEICTestcanbeequatedwiththatofSEPTatthesignificantlevel.05. Inaddition,JaturapitakkulandWatsonTodd(2018)wroteareportonmappingtheTestofEnglishforThaiEngineersandTechnologists(TETET)withtheCommonEuropeanFrameworkof Reference(CEFR) for Languages and comparing the TETETscoreswiththoseofotherEnglishproficiencytestssuchasTOEIC, IELTSandTOEFL.ThedevelopedTETETisusedtotestEnglishlanguageproficiencyof the test takers in four skills: reading,writing,listeningandspeaking.Thecontentofthetest isbased on the situations that Thai engineers andtechnologistsarerequiredtouseEnglish.InordertofindthetestvalidationandcomparetheTETETscoreswiththeTOEICTest,thestudywasconductedwith124testtakerswhotookboththeTETETandtheTOEICTest.ThefindingsshowedthattherewasacorrelationbetweentheTETETscoresandtheTOEICTestscores(.883).ThismeansthattheTETETandtheTOEICTestwereverystronglycorrelated.InordertofindtherelationshipbetweentheTETETbandlevelsandthesixCEFRlevels,thestudywasconductedbymappingandidentifyingtheminimumscoresorlevelstoseeiftheTETETcorrespondedtoeachCEFRlevel.Thepanelof10expertswasasked to assess each individual TETET test itembasedontheCEFRlevelsanddescriptors.Finally,the cut-off scoreswere reportedbasedoneachCEFRlevel. A number of studiesmentioned abovefacilitate the description and guidelines of testconstructioninrelationtotheCEFRstandard.Thisreflectsthemainpurposeofthisstudythatisto

findtherelationshipbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoresbasedontheCEFRlevels.Itishopedthattheresultsofthisstudywillsupportthe standard of the in-house test and help theuniversity target student achievement in Englishproficiency.

3.ResearchMethodology 3.1 Participants The participants in this study can be dividedinto2maingroups, i.e.thegroupoftestwriters and experts and the group of studentparticipants. 1. Testwritersandexperts Inordertodevelopthetest,7EFLlecturerswhohadeithermasters’degreesordoctoratesinEnglishlanguageteachingandlearningtookpartinwritingtheK-StEPtestitems.Thenanother5expertswiththesamequalificationsasthe7testwritersevaluatedtheconstructedtestitemsbyusingItemObjective Congruence (IOC) form and another 2expertswhoweretrainedandhadexperience inselecting theK-StEP test items selected the testitemsbasedontheK-StEPtestspecification.Allofthe experts are EFL lecturers that had eithermasters’degreesordoctoratesinEnglishlanguageteachingandlearning.TheirexperienceofteachingEnglishisatleast5years. 2. Studentparticipants a. Thestudentparticipantsinthepilotstudyincluded178students(92malesand86females)fromtheFacultiesofEngineering,AppliedSciences,InformationTechnology,TechnicalEducation,andIndustrialTechnology. b.Anothergroupofthestudentparticipantswasaskedtoparticipateinthemainstudy.Theyconsistedof105studentsfromtheabovefacultiesthatwerewillingtotakethe2tests,i.e.K-StEPTestandTOEICTestinthesameweek. 3.2 Researchprocedures Thestudywasdevelopedthrough4mainphases:Phase1:Theresearchersstudiedtherelated

94 I

documentandresearch,setupaworkshoponCEFRforthetestwriters,andwrotethetestspecification;Phase2:Seventestwritersdevelopedandwrote150 K-StEP test items based on the K-StEP Testspecificat ion, which included Engl ish incommunicativeandacademiccontextsatvariouslevelsbasedonCEFRA2,B1,andB2.Thenanativespeaker of English proofread and edited all thedevelopedtestitems.Afterthat5expertsevaluatedtheIOCform,andanother2expertsselected100testitemsbasedontheK-StEPtestspecification,

whichconsistedof30itemsforlistening,30itemsforreading,and40itemsforgrammarusageandstructure;Phase3:TheconstructedK-StEPtestitemswerepilotedwith178studentparticipantstofindthereliabilityandqualityofthetest;andPhase4:Another105studentstookthefinal100K-StEPtestitemsandtheTOEICTest inthesameweekandthen the students’ scores of both tests wereanalyzedtomapandfindthecut-offscoreofthetwotests.TheresearchmethodologyandprocedurearepresentedinFigure1below.

Figure1Researchmethodologyandprocedure

Phase1:Studytherelateddocumentand

research

Phase2:Developthetest

basedonCEFRdescriptors

Phase3:Pilotstudy

Clearconceptindevelopingthetest

FirstdraftofK-StEPTest

K-StEPTestwiththerequired

specifications

1.Studyrelatedliteratureandresearch.2.SetupaworkshoponCEFR.3.Writethetestspecification.

1.Setupateamtodevelopthetest.2.HaveanativespeakerofEnglish toproofreadandeditthetest.3.Have5expertstoconductIOC.4.Have2expertstoselectthetest itemsrandomlybasedonthe testspecification.

1.Pilottheconstructedtestitems.2.Evaluatethetestqualityby performingitemanalysis.3.Revisethetestitemstobeused inthemainstudy.

Phase4:Testadministrationanddatacollection

1.Correlationvalue ofthetwotests.2.Thevalueof regressionanalysis3.Cut-offscores betweenthe twotests

1.Administerthetestto105students.2.Havethesamegroupof studentsundertaketheTOEICTest.3.Analyzethedataobtainedfrom bothtests.4.MaptheK-StEPTestscoreswith theTOEICTestscorestofindthe cut-offscore.

PHASE OUTPUTSACTIVITIES

I 95

3.3 ResearchInstrument TheresearchinstrumentusedinthisstudyistheK-StEPTest.TheK-StEPTestwasdevelopedinthefollowingsteps:

1. TheconstructionoftheK-StEPTest The testwasdevelopedaccording to thetestspecificationasshowninTable4below.

Table4 ThespecificationofK-StEPTest

Purposesofthetest Description

Typesoftesttakers UndergraduateandgraduatestudentsofKMUTNB.Theyarenon-native speakersofthetargetlanguage.

Testlevel ThedifficultyofthetestissetasA2,B1,andB2basedonCEFRdescriptors.

Numberoftestitems Thetestisdividedinto3partsof100itemsofwhich30itemswereina listeningpart,30itemsinareadingpart,and40itemsconcerninggrammar usageandstructure.Allitemsare4-optionmultiplechoices.Thecontext included3areas,i.e.ageneralsettingfordailylife,campuslife,and academiccontextinvariousfields.

Marks Computationalcheckingwithonescoreforeachitem

Timeallocation Threehours

TheK-StEPTesthasbeendesignedforbothgraduateandundergraduatestudentsthatarenon-nativespeakersofEnglish.EnglishproficiencyisoneoftherequirementsforthegraduationofKMUTNBstudents from both levels. The test evaluatesEnglishproficiencyinthereceptiveskillsoflistening,reading,andgrammarusageandstructurebasedonCEFRlevelsofA2,B1,andB2.ThestructureandspecificationoftheK-StEPTestaredescribedbelow. The listening sectionmeasures the testtakers’ ability to understand spoken English incommunicativeandacademiccontextsatvariouslevelsbasedonCEFRlevelsofA2,B1,andB2.Thecontents includepersonal particulars and familyinformation,shopping,employment(A2),mainidea,school,workandleisure(B1),technicaldiscussion,andspecialization (B2).Thesectionconsistsof3parts,i.e.shortdialogues,longdialogues,monologuesandlectureswith30multiplechoicequestions.

Thereadingsectionmeasuresthetesttakers’abilitytounderstandtherangeoffactual,descriptive,andinferencingoftextsandparagraphs.ThecontentandvocabularyrangeareinaccordancewiththeCEFRlevelsofA2,B1,andB2.Thequestionsaretofindthemainideas,majordetails,importantdetailsincluding vocabulary in contexts and pronounreferences.Thereare3 readingpassageswith30questions,eachisworth1point. The grammar usage and structure partassesses the ability of test takers on sentencestructuresandgrammarusageasanindirectwritingability assessment. The grammar points andvocabularyrangetestedinthegrammarusageandstructurepartarebasedontheCEFRlevelsofA2,B1, and B2. The first part comprises sentencecompletionof15items.Thesecondpartincludeddefininggrammaticalmistakesof15items.Thetesttakerswereaskedtochoosetheunderlinedparts

96 I

thatareungrammatical.Thelastpartisthecloze-testof10itemstocompletephrasesusingthemostappropriatevocabularyandthecorrectgrammaticalforms. 2. Toensure the reliability andvalidityofthetest,thefollowingprocesseswereintroduced. - 150test itemswerewrittenbythetestconstruction team that had attended the CEFRworkshop. - AllthetestitemswereeditedbyanativespeakerofEnglishinordertocheckthecorrectnessandsuitablelanguageuse. - All the test itemswere validated by 5expertsfortheIOC.TheitemwiththeIOCindexlower than 0.5 was either rejected or revised.Therefore, the IOC resultof theoverall testwasbetween 0.6 to 1 showing that every itemwascongruentwithcontentvalidityandcanbeusedtoassessEnglishproficiency. - The100 test itemswere thenselectedrandomlybasedonthetestspecificationbyanother2experts. - Thefinal100testitemsweretrialedwith178 students to find the difficulty index and

reliabilitylevel.Theoveralldifficultyis0.246withthereliabilityof0.882. Afterthepilotresult,the100testitemswerethenrevisedtoadjusttheitemswithhighdifficultyandthen,trialedagain.Theoutcomesofthemainstudywere0.95reliabilityand0.492difficultyindex,meaningaveryhighcredibilityandreliability.

4.ResultsandDiscussion In this study, the findings are presentedaccordingto3researchquestionsand2hypotheses. Research question 1: What are theconcurrent validity values of the K-StEP TestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores? InordertoexaminetherelationshipbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores,theanalysisofthecorrelationcoefficientbymeansofPerson’sProductMomentwasemployed. Hypothesis 1 was set to investigate therelationshipbetween theK-StEPTest scoresandtheTOEICTestscores. Hypothesis1:ThereisasignificantrelationshipbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoresatthe.05level.(H1:rxy≠0)

Table5 TheCorrelationCoefficientbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores

K-StEP TOEIC

K-StEP PearsonCorrelation 1 .877**

Sig.(2-tailed) .00 N 105 105

**Correlationissignificantatthe.01level(2-tailed).*Correlationissignificantatthe.05level(2-tailed).

ThefindingsfromTable5showedthatthecorrelation coefficient between the K-StEP TestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoreswas.877anditisstatisticallysignificant(p<.01).APearsonProduct-Moment Correlationwas run to determine therelationshipbetween theK-StEPTest scoresand

the TOEIC Test scores. Therewas a strong andpositivecorrelationbetweenthescoresofthetwotests(y=.877,N=105,p<.01). It can be concluded that the K-StEP Testscores have a high positive correlationwith theTOEICTestscores.Thismeansthatifonevariable

I 97

positivelyincreases,thereisapositiveincreaseinanothervariableatthehighlevel.Consequently,Hypothesis 1 stating that there is a significantrelationshipbetween theK-StEPTest scoresandtheTOEICTestscoresatthe.05level(H1:rxy≠0)isaccepted. Researchquestion2:TowhatextentcantheK-StEPTest scorespredict theTOEICTestscores?

Hypothesis2wasestablishedtoexamineiftheK-StEPTestscorescanpredicttheTOEICTestscores. Hypothesis 2: The K-StEP Test scores cansignificantlypredicttheTOEICTestscoresatthe.05level.(H2:B≠0). ASimpleRegressionAnalysiswasemployedtoassessthesecondhypothesis.Table6showsthemodelsummaryoftheSimpleRegressionAnalysis.

Table6 TheModelsummaryoftheSimpleRegressionAnalysis

Model R RSquare AdjustRSquare Std.Error oftheEstimate

1 .877 a .770 .767 72.57

Predictors:(Constant),K-StEPscoresDependentvariable:TOEICscores

TheR-coefficientof.877wasshowninTable6. The R-Squarewas .770. Thismeans that theindependent variable can explain 77% of the

varianceintheTOEICTestscores.Thestandarderrorof the estimate is 72.57. Table 7 illustrates thecoefficientsoftheregressionmodel.

Table7 TheCoefficientsoftheRegressionModel

Unstandardized Standardized Model Coefficients Coefficients t Sig.

B Std.Error Beta

1 (Constant) -51.942 27.275.877

-1.904 .060

K-StEP 8.702 .469 18.552 .000

*DependentVariable:TOEICscores

The unstandardized coefficient B is theincrease or decrease in the dependent variablewhen an independent variable increases byone

unit.TheregressionequationusedtopredicttheTOEICTestscorescanthenbewrittenasfollows:

y = a+bx TOEICTestscores = -51.942+8.702(K-StEPTestscores)

98 I

Accordingtotheaboveequation,theK-StEPTestscorescanbeusedtopredicttheTOEICTestscores.With a unit increases in the K-StEP Testscores,theTOEICTestscoreswillincreaseby8.702withastandarderrorof.469. Insummary,Hypothesis2whichstatesthatthe independent variable can individually or incombinationsignificantlypredicttheTOEICscoresatthe.05level(H2:B≠0)isaccepted.IftesttakersknowtheirK-StEPTestscores,itispossiblethattheywillknowtheTOEICTestscores. Researchquestion3:WhataretheabilitybandsfordefiningEnglishlevelsobtainedfromtheK-StEPscores?

SinceoneoftheobjectivesofthecurrentstudywastofindtheabilitybandsordescriptorsfordefiningEnglishproficiencyobtainedfromtheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores,thedescriptorsofCEFRlevelsoflanguageproficiencywereadoptedinthestudy.Inthepresentstudy,thedescriptorsofCEFRlevelsA1,A2,B1,andB2wereadoptedtoidentifytheEnglishabilityofthetesttakersateachlevelbecausetheyprovidethebanddescriptorsthatcandescribetheperformanceandabilitythatthecandidatesortesttakersoftheK-StEPTestandtheTOEICTestarelikelytobeabletodo. Bymeansofequationobtained,therangesoftheK-StEPTestscoresthatwereconvertedtotheTOEICTestscorescanbeillustratedinTable8.

Table8 TheAbilityDescriptorsoftheK-StEPTestscoresequivalenttotheTOEICTestscoresbased onthedescriptorsofCEFRlevelA1,A2,B1andB2

Numberof Students

K-StEP TOEIC CEFR AbilitydescriptorsofCEFR

3 20-31 120-224 A1 Canunderstandandusefamiliareverydayexpressionsand (2.8%) verybasicphrasesaimedatthesatisfactionofneedsofa

concretetype.Canintroducehim/herselfandothersandcan ask and answer questions about personal details suchaswherehe/she lives,peoplehe/sheknowsandthingshe/shehas.Caninteractinasimplewayprovidedtheotherpersontalksslowlyandclearlyandispreparedtohelp.

74 32-68 225-549 A2 Canunderstandsentencesandfrequentlyusedexpressions (70.47%) relatedtoareasofmostimmediaterelevance(e.g.very

basic personal and family information, shopping, localgeography,employment).Cancommunicateinsimpleandroutinetasksrequiringasimpleanddirectexchangeofinformationonfamiliarandroutinematters.Candescribeinsimpletermsaspectsofhis/herbackground,immediateenvironmentandmattersinareasofimmediateneed.

I 99

Table8 (Continued)

Numberof Students

K-StEP TOEIC CEFR AbilitydescriptorsofCEFR

26 69-95 550-785 B1 Canunderstandthemainpointsofclearstandardinput (24.76%) onfamiliarmattersregularlyencounteredinwork,school,

leisure,etc.Candealwithmostsituationslikelytoarisewhilsttravellinginanareawherethelanguageisspoken.Canproducesimpleconnectedtextontopicswhicharefamiliarorofpersonalinterest.Candescribeexperiencesandevents,dreams,hopesandambitionsandbrieflygivereasonsandexplanationsforopinionsandplans.

2 96or (1.9%) above 786-944 B2 Canunderstandthemainideasofcomplextextonboth

concrete and abstract topics, including technicaldiscussionsinhis/herfieldofspecialization.Caninteractwith a degree of fluency and spontaneity thatmakesregular interactionwith native speakers quite possiblewithoutstrainforeitherparty.Canproduceclear,detailedtextonawiderangeofsubjectsandexplainaviewpointonatopicalissuegivingtheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofvariousoptions.

Table 8 presents the K-StEP Test cut-offscores in relation to the TOIEC Test scores. TheEnglishproficiencyof the students is interpretedbasedonCEFRabilitybandswhich include“cando” statements. They describe what a foreignlanguagelearnercandoateachlevel.Inthisstudy,itcanbeinterpretedthattherewereonly2studentsor1.9%inB2level.TheyachievedtheK-StEPTestscores of over 96% and the TOEIC Test scoresbetween786and944. Therewere26or24.76%ofthestudentsintheB1level,theirabilityhavingbeendescribedinTable 8.Most of the test takers, 74 students or70.47%wereinA2levelwiththeK-StEPTestscoresbetween32to68andwiththeTOEICTestscoresrangingfrom225to549.Thoughthetesthadbeen

designedtoevaluatetheEnglishproficiencylevelA2,B1,andB2,therewere3studentsor2.8%whogainedtheK-StEPTestscoresbetween20to31andtheTOEICTestscoresfrom120to224orinA1level. Insummary,oncetheK-StEPTestscoresarereported,thetesttakerswillknowtheirTOEICTestscoresandtheirCEFRlevelsandunderstandthedescriptorsexplainingwhattheycandointheabilitydescriptorsofCEFRlevels.

5.Discussion 5.1 ThecorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores ThehighpositivecorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoresmeansthat if one variable positively increases, then apositiveincreaseinanothervariablewilloccur.The

100 I

findingisinagreementwithAnuyahongsa’s(2015)study,whichrevealedthattherewasaveryhighpositivecorrelationbetweentheTNIEnglishabilitytestscoresandtheTOEICTestscores.Also,similarfindingwasalsofoundinJaturapitakkulandWatsonTodd’s(2018)report,whichrevealedthattherewasahighcorrelationbetweentheTETETscoresandtheTOEICTestscores.ThismeansthattheTETETandtheTOEICTestwereverystronglycorrelated.Inthecurrentstudy,thestructureoftheK-StEPTestisquitesimilartothatoftheTOEICTestinthattheyinclude listening, reading, structure, andwrittenexpression with only 4-multiple choice items.ThoughtheTOEICtestconsistsofahighernumberofitems-200items,theK-StEPTestconsistsofonly100items.However,themainpurposeistoassessstudents’Englishproficiency.AnotherremarkablepartisthattheconstructionofthetwotestsisbasedontheCEFRdescriptorsthattrytotestwhatforeignlanguagelearnerscandoateachproficiencylevel.The study revealed highly positive correlationbetween the two tests which provided solidevidencethattheK-StEPTestcaneffectivelyassesstesttakers’EnglishproficiencyinparalleltothatoftheTOEICTest. 5.2 Theequatingpredictivevalidity The purpose of conducting a SimpleRegressionAnalysisistoevaluatetherelativeimpactof a predicted variable. This is different from acorrelationanalysisbecauseitexaminesthedegreeofrelationshipbetweenthetwovariableswhichinthisstudyaretheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTest scores. According to the result of researchquestion2,itcanbeconcludedthattheK-StEPTestscorescanbeusedtopredicttheTOEICTestscoresinthesignificantdegree.Thefindingoftheregressionanalysiswascongruentwiththatoftheconcurrentvalidity.SimilarfindingwasfoundinthestudyofChanchusakunetal.(2007),whichrevealedthattheSEPTscorescanbeusedtopredicttheTOEICTestscoresatthesignificantlevel.05.

5.3 TheabilitybandstodescribeEnglishproficiencylevelsoftheK-StEPTest Afterbeingmapped, the cut-off scoresoftheK-StEPTestweremeasuredwithrespecttotheCEFR levels and the TOEIC Test scores. Theinterpretationcanbemade,forexample,aswhenastudentachievesascoreof70intheK-StEPTest,this student is considered to have an Englishproficiencyequivalentto600inTOEICorB1ofCEFR.BasedontheCEFRglobalscale,thisstudentcan: - Understand themain points of clearstandard input on familiar matters regularlyencounteredinwork,school,leisure,etc. - Dealwithmost situations likely to arisewhilsttravellinginanareawherethelanguageisspoken. -Producesimpleconnectedtextontopicswhicharefamiliarorofpersonalinterest. -Describeexperiencesandevents,dreams,hopesandambitionsandbrieflygivereasonsandexplanations for opinions and plans. (Council ofEurope,2011) Stakeholders inKMUTNBstudentssuchasteachers, university administrators, or employerscanusetheinformationoncut-offscorelevelsoftheK-StEPTestindevelopingstudents’proficiency,designing curricula, setting targets or setting theentrancescoreorplanningpolicy.Theinformationcanalsobeusedtoconstructmaterialsandplanclassroom activities. Moreover, the studentsthemselveswillknowtheirexistingabilityinEnglishandcanpersonallydeveloptomeettherequiredlevel.Testingandevaluationiscloselyrelatedtotheprocessof learningandteaching. Itaimsnotonlyevaluatingthelearners’proficiency,butalsoproviding clear target for learners to developthemselvesbasedontheircompetency.Therefore,standardtestingispartofsuccessfulinstructiontoprovidesuitablelearninglevelsandcontent.

I 101

6.Conclusion Thisstudyhasprovidedasummaryofthedevelopment and validation of the K-StEP TestincludingthecorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscores and the TOEIC Test scores. The findingsrevealedahighlypositivecorrelationbetweentheK-StEPTestscoresandtheTOEICTestscoresat.877.The results of the Simple Regression Analysisshowed high equating validity between the twotests.Moreover,theresultscanbeusedtocomparethe test scores of the two tests anddefine theEnglishabilityofthetesttakers.Theinformationonthecut-offscorelevelcanbeusedindevelopingstudents’proficiencyanddesigningsuitablecoursesforthem. 6.1 Limitationsofthestudy Even though every effort wasmade toproducevalidandreliableresultsofthestudy,thereareseverallimitationsthatshouldbeconsideredcarefully. -Thefirstlimitationisonthetypeoftest. The TOEIC Testmeasures general Englishlanguage proficiency particularly in a workingcontext while the K-StEP Test is designed forassessingEnglishproficiencyinacademicendeavors.Thenumberofitemsisalsodifferent.However,the2 tests aim to assess test takers’ languageproficiency. Both TOEIC and K-StEP Tests canmeasure only receptive skills, i.e., listening andreadingskills.Therefore,thetesttakersundertakethetestbasedononlylinguisticcompetencethatisnotsimilartorealperformance.Theinterpretationofdescriptorsneedstobeappliedwithcaution. -ThesecondlimitationisonCEFRdescriptors. SinceCEFRdescriptorsare illustrative,notdefinitivewhichmeansthattheycanbeinterpreteddifferently by different experts. Thismeans thatdifferent interpretation can lead to deviation injudgmentof test itemsand cut-off scores. Thus,discussionamongexperts in thestandardsetting

process is necessary so that understanding andinterpretation of the CEFR descriptors will beconsistent. 6.2 Suggestions Based on the above limitations, a futurestudyusinganothermethodi.e.Angoffmethod,agroupofpanelistsandotherdifferentstandardtestscouldbeconducted.Furtherresearchisneededtoinvestigate the correlation and cut-off scoresperhapswith other standard tests. Themappingprocess needs to be done carefullywith highernumbersofexperts.TrainingontheAngoffmethodisnecessarybeforemapping.Also,thecurrentcut-offscoresshouldbeconsideredbyanotherpanelofexpertstoincreasecredibility. Anothersuggestionisthatthereshouldbeadirectmeasureofwritingskillsandspeakingskillsin the K-StEP Testwithwhich to gauge the realperformanceofthetesttakersaccordingtotheCEFRcriteria.

7.Acknowledgements This research was funded by the ThaiGovernment Budget Expenditure, KingMongkut’sUniversity of TechnologyNorth Bangkok and theFacultyofAppliedArts.Theauthorswouldliketoexpresstheirgratitudetowardsallparticipantsandthe Faculty staff for their kind cooperation andwillingnesstotakepartinthisstudy.

8.ReferencesAnuyahongsa, B. (2015). Comparisonof Efficiency

betweenTNIEnglishAbilityTestandTOEICTest.Journal of Business Administration and Languages. 3(1),1-6.

Chanchusakun,S.,Paiwithayasiritham,C.,Polpanthin,Y.&Supannopaph,P.(2017).AComparisonof Quality of Equating English Scoresbetween Equipercentile, Linear andRegressionMethods. Veridian E-Journal. Silpakorn University, 10(2),2444-2455.

102 I

Council of Europe. (2011). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR).Retrievedfromwww.coe.int/lang-cefr

EducationFirst(2018).EF English Proficiency Index.Retrievedfromwww.ef.co.th/epi/

Hirai,M.(2008).CorrelationbetweenSTEPBULATSwriting and TOEIC scores. Divergence andConvergence, Educating with Integrity:Proceedings of the 7th Annual JALT Pan-SIG Conference. Retrieved fromhttp://hosted.jalt.org/pansig/2008/HTML/Hirai1.htm

H i ranburana , H .Subphadoongchone , P .Tangkiengsirisin,S.Phoochaeoensil,S.Gainey,J. Thogsongsri , J. Sumonsriworakun, P.Somphong,M. Sappapan. P, & Taylor, P.(2017).AFrameworkofreferenceforEnglishLanguageeducationinThailand(FRELE-TH)-basedontheCEFR,TheThaiexperience.LEARN Journal, 10(2),90-119.

Jaturapitakkul,N.&WatsonTodd,R.(2018).TestofEnglishforThaiEngineersandTechnologists(TETET)TechnicalSupport.Retrieved fromwww. Sola.kmutt.ac.th/ tetet/doc/TETET_Technical_report_NJ_RT_Complete.pdf

Martyniuk,W. (Ed). (2010). Aligning testwith theCEFR:Case studiesand reflectionson theuseoftheCouncilofEurope’sdraftmanual.Studies in Language testing.33.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

National Institute of Education Testing Services.(2018).Manual for the 4th round external quality assessment in basic education. Samutprakarn,Thailand:OffsetPlus.

Norris,J.M.(2006).Thewhy(andhow)ofstudentlearningoutcomesassessmentincollegeFLeducation.The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 576-583. Retrieved fromhttps://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00466_2.x

North,B.(2014).The CEFR in practice 4.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

OfficeoftheBasicEducationCommission.(2018).Basic education core curriculum.Bangkok.

Tannenbaum,R.J.andWylie,E.C.(2015).Mapping TOEIC Test scores to the STANG language proficiency level.Retrievedfromwww.ets.org/toeic