Abstract

This paper made a case for greater linguistic input into the evaluation of ESL Objective Tests in order to enhance the tests' quality. There are no evaluative criteria specifically for ESL Objective Tests, and the general criteria for language test evaluation lack sufficient linguistic input to meet the peculiar demand of ESL Objective Tests. Language test evaluation is not known to have been theorised from the perspective of the linguistic items that constitute them. The paper critically examined existing criteria for evaluating language tests, and adopted validity as an all-embracing, superordinate term for language test evaluation since reliability and practicality are necessary conditions for validity. It proposed three linguistics-informed criteria for establishing the validity of ESL Objective Tests without necessarily jettisoning other sources and types of validity evidence exemplified by scoring validity. The criteria are linguistic content (adequacy of coverage, test items, and distracters), testing techniques (suitability for testing goals, and language and skills areas), and testees' performance (correlation with actual language ability). To mitigate the inadequacies of ESL Objective Tests, the capacity of the tests' linguistic content to realise the defined goals of testing should be prioritised during its determination.