| The phenomenon of how external tests influence teaching and learning is commonly described as "washback" in language instruction. Literature indicates that testing washback is a complex concept that becomes even more complex under a variety of interpretations of the washback phenomenon on teaching and learning. Some studies conclude that no simple washback effect occurs (Alderson and Hamp-Lyons, 1996; Watanabe, 1996), whereas others find powerful determiners of language testing toward classroom teaching (Hughes, 1988; Khaniya, 1990; Herman and Golan, 1991).; The purpose of this study was to investigate how English teachers in Taiwan junior high schools perceived the impact of a reformed public examination, called the Basic Competency Test (BCT), on their curricular planning and instruction. This study was expected to add to the existing literature on testing washback in an English as a foreign language context.; The relational research method was used in this research. The target population was Taiwan junior high school English teachers. The survey method (a quantitative method) and focus group interviews (a qualitative method) were used to collect data. Data were analyzed in two phases.{09}Bivariate correlation and multiple regression analyses were used to analyze the quantitative data. Content analysis using a note-based technique interpreted the qualitative data.; Findings from this study indicate that the BCT has an influential impact on teachers' curricular planning and instruction. However, such a washback influence on teachers' teaching attitudes is quite superficial; that is, the washback may influence teachers what to teach but not how to teach. The reason for why it influences teaching contents is because of the issuance of new teaching materials for nation-wide junior high schools. Due to the lack of in-service teacher training, teachers lack knowledge of how to change their teaching methods in order to align with the new curriculum. Based upon the findings, this study recommends: (1) provide teachers with extensive professional development opportunities, (2) change the "academic watch" policy, (3) practice mix-ability grouping instead of achievement grouping to group students, and (4) integrate assessment into classroom evaluation. |
