Language testers can have various roles in relation to the use of language tests and policy. One such role may be to provide expert advice in policy formation or policy review contexts. Such instances are often not documented systematically, as advice may be provided in informal or closed meetings, or confidential documents, which are not available to the public. The challenges associated with providing such advice are also rarely recorded. In this paper, I describe three instances in which the Language Testing Research Centre (LTRC) at the University of Melbourne was invited to provide external policy advice. I specifically reflect on what prompted the invitations, what advice we were asked to provide, the complexity of providing advice in each instance, and whether the advice was taken up by the policy makers. The paper reflects on some of the common threads and concludes with implications for training new language testers.
While the importance of accounting for the use of tests as policy instruments is by now widely acknowledged, validation frameworks in language testing rest on core assumptions which, I argue, preclude consideration of the lived experiences and subjectivities of test takers, and of the intentions and purposeful actions these experiences and subjectivities engender. As a result, the complex and dynamic ways that test taker actions are implicated in generating test and policy consequences remain hidden from view, as do the ethical implications of the wider societal impacts of testing practices. Drawing on studies examining test taker experiences of the use of English testing for immigration purposes in the Australian context, I highlight the disconnect between how test takers, test users and language testers come to attribute meanings to testing practices in this complex policy setting, and the types of conflicting decisions and actions which then emerge. To conclude, I argue for a renewed criticality in language testing that extends beyond evaluations of how well, if at all, test uses align with the expectations of test users and/or language testers, to a focus on the expectations of test takers as the stakeholder group to whom we must be primarily accountable. This demands not only further research into the lived experiences of those subjected to testing practices, but also an engagement with the wider discursive space within which problems of language and of policy are imagined, and the ways in which language testing, as a discipline, is implicated in the production of idealised language users, workers, and citizens, together with the various exclusions these entail.
The importance of viewing tests in their policy contexts is now widely recognized in our field. The Language Testing Research Centre (LTRC), as a self-funding Centre, responds by necessity to policy shifts and the language testing initiatives it has undertaken over the years offer insights into broader societal and more local institutional imperatives. The Centre’s language testing activities also have the potential to influence policy, whether directly or indirectly. This paper offers a historical overview of the Centre’s various projects in the languages (other than English) arena over a 30-year period, describing the diverse orientations adopted (i.e. to inform, enact or evaluate policy) with particular reference to three cases illustrative of different policy trends. I speculate about the policy impact of each case, highlighting the complexities encountered and some of the factors favouring and inhibiting policy uptake. Insights from these particular cases are then linked to the research literature on policy impact to propose recommendations for ‘policy responsible‘ language testing.
