online testing
test effectiveness
language skills assessment
formative assessment

How to Cite

O. O. Kucherova and I. O. Ushakova, “EFFECTIVENESS OF ONLINE TESTING IN GENERAL ENGLISH UNIVERSITY COURSE FROM TEACHER AND STUDENT PERSPECTIVES”, ITLT, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 185–198, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.33407/itlt.v87i1.4812.


With most switching to distance education due to the pandemic caused by COVID-19, the efficacity of assessment is a major concern. The research was aimed to analyze how Moodle learning management system (LMS) can be applied to online language testing, study the effectiveness of online testing and compare the students’ and teachers’ attitude towards online testing in General English university course. Online tests were administrated as a synchronous component of the distance learning to 857 first-year bachelor’s degree students of “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy” (Ukraine) by 20 teachers during the 2020-2021 academic year. A mixed research design was employed, which involved collecting data using an online questionnaire completed by students and teachers anonymously as Microsoft Forms; Excel spreadsheets were used for the analysis afterward. A quantitative descriptive study was conducted to evaluate the students’ and teachers’ satisfaction with online testing. The expert evaluation method was prioritized to define the expediency of the effectiveness of the online test by the specified criteria and indicators based on the judgments expressed by 7 experienced teachers who are competent in test design. In addition, Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated to compare the results of an online test and oral exam. The qualitative research method allowed to analyse and interpret data of the experimental learning. Based on the results of our study, we can conclude that different types of Moodle LMS questions can be successfully applied to online language testing as part of course assessment at the university level. The paper argues that online language testing can be effective and relevant to course objectives from both students’ and teachers’ perspectives with positive washback on education. The results of the study can be employed by university teachers for language course design both for distance and blended learning.



O. B. Adedoyin and E. Soykan, “Covid-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities,” Interactive Learning Environments, pp. 1–13, 2020, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180. (in English)

Y. Krylova-Grek and M. P. Shyshkina, “Online learning at higher education institutions in Ukraine: achievements, challenges, and horizons,” Information Technologies and Learning Tools, vol. 85, no. 5, pp. 163–174, 2021, doi: 10.33407/itlt.v85i5.4660. (in English)

S. Naidu, “Reimagining education futures to lead learning for tomorrow,” Distance education, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 327–330, 2021, doi: 10.1080/01587919.2021.1956306. (in English)

D. A. McFarlane, “Facilitating and dealing with learner differences in the online classroom,” European Journal of Educational Research, vol. 1 (1), pp. 1–12, 2012, doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.1.1.1. (in English)

M. Decuypere, E. Grimaldi, and P. Landri, “Introduction: Critical studies of digital education platforms,” Critical Studies in Education, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2021, doi: 10.1080/17508487.2020.1866050. (in English)

M. Arshad, “Experience of using the Blackboard learning management system in Jazan University,” Information Technologies and Learning Tools, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 79–99, 2021, doi: 10.33407/itlt.v83i3.4185. (in English)

F. J. García-Peñalvo, A. Corell, V. Abella-García, and M. Grande-de-Prado, “Recommendations for Mandatory Online Assessment in Higher Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” in Radical Solutions for Education in a Crisis Context. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology, D. Burgos, A. Tlili, and A. Tabacco, Eds. Springer, Singapore, 2021, pp. 85–98, doi: 10.1007/978-981-15-7869-4_6. (in English)

O’Sullivan, K. Dunn, and V. Berry, “Test preparation: an international comparison of test takers’ preferences,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 13–36, 2021, doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2019.1637820. (in English)

E. Stradiotová, I. Nemethova, and R. Stefancik, “Comparison of on-site testing with online testing during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Advanced education, vol. 8 (17), pp. 73–83, 2021, doi: 10.20535/2410-8286.229264. (in English)

Arnold, “Cheating at online formative tests: Does it pay off?,” The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 29, pp. 98–106, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.02.001. (in English)

W. Bloemers, A. Oud, and K. van Dam, “Cheating on unproctored internet intelligence tests: Strategies and effects,” Personnel Assessment and Decisions, vol. 2 (1), pp. 21–29, 2016, doi: 10.25035/pad.2016.003. (in English)

D. L. King and C. J. Case, “E-cheating: Incidence and trends among college students,” Issues in Information Systems, vol. 15 (1), pp. 20–27, 2014, doi: 10.48009/1_iis_2014_20-27. (in English)

G. Nguyen, K. J. Keuseman, and J. J. Humston, “Minimize online cheating for online assessments during COVID-19 pandemic,” Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 97 (9), pp. 3429–3435, 2020, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00790. (in English)

D. Steger, U. Schroeders, and O. Wilhelm, “Caught in the act: Predicting cheating in unproctored knowledge assessment,” Assessment, vol. 28 (3), pp. 1004–1017, 2021, doi: 10.1177/1073191120914970 (in English)

“The future of assessment: five principles, five targets for 2025,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/reports/the-future-of-assessment (in English)

C. A. Chapelle, B. Kremmel, and G. Brindley, “Assessment,” in An Introduction to applied linguistics, N. Schmitt and M. P. H. Rogers, Eds. London; Routledge, 2020, pp. 294–316. (in English)

D. Brown, Language assessment. Principles and classroom practices. Longman, 2004. (in English)

R. Dann, “Assessment as learning: blurring the boundaries of assessment and learning for theory, policy and practice,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 149–166, 2014, doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2014.898128. (in English)

M. Quinlan and E. Pitt, “Towards signature assessment and feedback practices: a taxonomy of discipline-specific elements of assessment for learning,” Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 191–207, 2021, doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2021.1930447. (in English)

C. E. Turner and J. E. Purpura, “Learning-oriented assessment in second and foreign language classrooms,” in Handbook of second language assessment, D. Tsagari and J. Banerjee, Eds. Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton, 2016, pp. 255–271. (in English)

J. Lantolf and M. Poehner, “Dynamic assessment in the classroom: Vygotskyan praxis for second language development,” Language teaching research, vol. 15, pp. 11–33, 2011. (in English)

B. W. Yang, J. Razo, and A. M. Persky, “Using Testing as a Learning Tool,” American journal of pharmaceutical education, vol. 83(9), p. 1862–1872, 2019, doi: 10.5688/ajpe7324. (in English)

J. D. Brown and T. Hudson, Criterion-referenced language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. (in English)

J. Lewkowicz and C. Leung, “Classroom-based assessment,” Language Teaching, vol. 54(1), pp. 47–57, 2021, doi: 10.1017/S0261444820000506. (in English)

Council of Europe. Common European framework of reference for languages: learning, teaching, assessment, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learning-teaching/16809ea0d4 (in English)

E. Piccardo, “From communicative to action-oriented: a research pathway,” 2014. [Online]. Available: https://transformingfsl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/TAGGED_DOCUMENT_CSC605_Research_Guide_English_01.pdf (in English)

D. L. Bandalos, Measurement theory and applications for the social sciences, New York, London: The Guilford Press, 2018. (in English)

J. Harmer J. The Practice of English Language Teaching (4th ed.), Pearson Longman ELT, 2007. (in English)

J. D. Brown, “Assessment in ELT: Theoretical options and sound pedagogical choices,” in English language teaching today. Linking theory and practice, W. A. Renandya and H. P. Widodo, Eds. Springer, 2016, pp. 67–82. (in English)

Ushakova, “Osoblyvosti vykorystannia systemy Moodle v umovakh dystantsiinoho vykladannia anhliiskoi movy dlia studentiv 1 roku navchannia [Features of using LMS Moodle in distance English teaching for the 1-year university students],” in Osvita 2.0: zbirnyk materialiv naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii [Education 2.0. Proceedings of scientific-practical conference], Sievierodonetsk: LDUVS imeni E. O. Didorenka, 2021, pp.128–134. [Online]. Available: https://lduvs.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/Docs/books/Osvita2.0.pdf (in Ukrainian)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2022 Олена Олександрівна Кучерова, Ірина Олександрівна Ушакова


Download data is not yet available.