A Washback Study of the Pancyprian Examinations on Teacher Stress

A Washback Study of the Pancyprian

Examinations on Teacher Stress Georgia Vraketta

MA TESOL

University of Leicester

School of Education ED7000: Dissertation

Submitted: September, 2013

Georgia Vraketta – ED7000: Dissertation – 2013 – MA TESOL

1

Abstract

Although a good amount of research exists on students’ perceptions of stress as a result of

high-stakes examinations, very little is known about how high-stakes examinations affect

teacher stress. Using findings from sixty four EFL teachers from Cyprus through a mixed-

methods research consisting of a web-based questionnaire including both closed- and open-

ended items, the present study examined the impact of washback of the Pancyprian

Examinations on teacher stress. Primarily, this study sought to discover what negative

washback, that is the negative influences the Pancyprian Examinations have on teaching,

learning, and other aspects, exists at schools and what measures can be introduced to improve

this negative washback. Participants completed the questionnaire, which was inviting them to

reflect on their personal opinions and experiences on high-stakes examinations. Results

suggest symptoms of high levels of teacher stress as a product of the Pancyprian

Examinations with some stressors being the time allocated for revision, the examination

syllabus, the students’ parents and the education system of Cyprus itself. Implications of

results are discussed, and recommendations that may reduce teacher stress as a result of the

Pancyprian Examinations and high-stakes examinations in general are introduced, and

suggestions for future research according to the findings of the present study are also made.


2

Acknowledgments

I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Professor Glenn Fulcher. Without his

continuous optimism concerning this dissertation, enthusiasm, readiness to help me,

encouragement and support, I would not be able to present this work the way it is presented.

Regrettably, I cannot acknowledge them by name, but I am deeply grateful to all the

participants who completed the questionnaires. Their willingness to participate and share

their invaluable insights and judgements was more than I would expect, and a significant part

of my work was built around their responses.

There are many people I would like to thank for just being there for me through the

rollercoaster of emotions this dissertation has made me feel over the last seven months.

Pavlos Apostolidis, Chrysostomos Perdios, Vasilis Vrakas, Stephanie Zeitouni, Victoria

Houry, Melanie Warren and her daughter Yazzy, Justin Willis, are only just a few.

In these difficult times we live both as a country and a planet, I must acknowledge the

tremendous sacrifices my family, and especially my parents Soulla and Iakovos, made to

ensure I had an excellent education. For this, I am forever in their debt; probably the only

debt I will ever be happy to pay off.

This dissertation is a dedication to my incredible grandfather, Michalis. His energy to live

life to the fullest, his passion about teaching and learning, and his experiences as a teacher and

an individual inspire me every day to become as excellent as him. I love you, pappou!


3

Contents

Abstract............................................................................................................................. ......1

Acknowledgments................................................................................................................2

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1.Background of the Study..............................................................................................5

1.2.Purpose and Scope of the Study...................................................................................5

1.3.Structure of the Study...................................................................................................6

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1.Introduction...................................................................................................................8

2.2.Brief History of High-Stakes Examinations.................................................................8

2.3.School Accountability...................................................................................................9

2.4.Advantages and Disadvantages of High-Stakes Examinations..................................10

2.5.The Educational System of Cyprus............................................................................11

2.6.Psychological Stress and Outcomes...........................................................................13

2.7.Teacher Stress.............................................................................................................14

2.8.Test Washback............................................................................................................15

2.9.Issues Associated with Washback and High-Stakes Examinations............................17

2.10. Curriculum and Washback.......................................................................................17

2.11. Class Time, Size and Washback...............................................................................18

2.12. Teaching Materials and Washback...........................................................................19

2.13. Student Learning and Washback..............................................................................19

2.14. Language Teachers and Washback..........................................................................20

2.15. Teacher Stress, Test Washback, and Summary of the Literature.............................21

Chapter 3: Methodology

3.1. Introduction..............................................................................................................23

3.2. Mixed-Methods Research.........................................................................................23

3.3. Conducting and Piloting the Questionnaire..............................................................24

3.4. Structure of the Questionnaire..................................................................................25

3.5. Sample and Recruitment Procedures........................................................................26

3.6. Introduction of Accommodations.............................................................................26

3.7. Data Analysis Procedure..........................................................................................27


4

3.8. Addressing Ethical Issues.........................................................................................27

3.9. Demographics and Focus Change............................................................................28

Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion

4.1. Introduction.....................,........................................................................................30

4.2. Influences of Washback of Test Construction and Preparation...............................30

4.3. Influences of Washback on Teaching Practices and School Performance...............32

4.4. Influences of Washback on Teacher Pressure..........................................................33

4.5. Influences of Washback on the Ways English is Taught in Cyprus.........................35

4.6. Influences of Washback on Teachers’ Perceptions About School Reputation........37

4.7. Influences of Washback on the Relationships Between Teachers and Parents........38

4.8. Recommendations to Reduce Teacher Stress...........................................................40

Chapter 5: Conclusions, Limitations and Future Research

5.1. Summary and Conclusions of the Study..................................................................43

5.2. Limitations of the Study...........................................................................................44

5.3. Suggestions for Further Research.............................................................................44

References.............................................................................................................................46

Appendices

A: Examples from Andrews, Fullilove and Wonga’s Findings.......................................51

B: Consent Letter.............................................................................................................52

C: Questionnaire..............................................................................................................53

Tables

3.9. Section I, Demographic Data/Frequencies/Percentages...........................................29

4.2. Section II, High-Stakes Test Preparation/Frequencies/Percentages.........................33

4.3. Chi-Square Test........................................................................................................34

4.4. Section III, Means, N-Sizes and Standard Deviations..............................................39

Figures

2.5. Cyprus’ Educational System....................................................................................11

2.7. Bailey’s Model of Washback...................................................................................17


5

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1.Background of the Study

It is widely accepted in the field of language testing that high-stakes examinations have,

nowadays, significant consequences for everyone involved, including the test takers, parents,

school administrators and sometimes the general public (Madaus 1988). However, high-

stakes examinations can also affect both teaching and learning, and this is what defines the

term ‘test washback’ (Alderson and Wall 1993). According to researchers who study

language testing (Bachman and Palmer 1996; Messick 1996), washback is observed as

positive, neutral, or negative. It is also suggested that it has both intended and unintended

consequences (Lattimore 2003; Andrews 2004; Qi 2005). Others, such as Pearson (1988) and

Shohamy (1992), accept washback as a potential tool for educational reform, i.e. a demand of

the improvement of education.

In the past, and up until twenty or so years ago, washback was connected with the design of a

test and its quality. Specifically, Heaton (1990: 16) provided an example of this relationship,

saying that “if it is a good examination, it will have a useful effect on teaching; if bad, then it

will have a damaging effect on teaching.” More recently, however, studies discovered that

there is not always a linear connection between the test design and the teaching and learning

that takes place for preparation for that test, with some researchers suggesting in their models

that teaching and learning are affected by far more factors than test design (Alderson and Wall

1993; Hughes 1993; Bailey 1996). These three researchers have managed to re-conceptualize

the notion of washback through their models, by informing several studies in the last two

decades, which will be reviewed in Chapter 2.

1.2.Purpose and Scope of the Study

The primary concern of the present study is to explore and illustrate the washback of the

Pancyprian Examinations (PE) on the perceptions of English as Foreign Language (EFL)

teachers in Cyprus during test preparation, and to what extent this washback affects their

stress levels. It should be noted at this point that the original aim was to collect data from

more than one country, but due to unforeseen circumstances which will be explained later, the

focus had to be changed. Whereas much is known about the effects washback of high-stakes

examinations has on student achievement, little is known how this washback impacts teacher

stress from an empirical perspective. The present study is conducted with a full awareness of


6

the fact that teachers have certain beliefs regarding high-stakes examinations. Therefore the

intention is to go as deep as possible to examine whether their beliefs respond to reality, and if

not, recommend feasible strategies that will improve student achievement, but most

importantly reduce teacher stress due to high-stakes examinations.

As it will be seen in later chapters, and for the purposes of this study, research data with the

implementation of a web-based questionnaire was accumulated. A total of 85 EFL teachers

accepted to complete this questionnaire, which included both quantitative and qualitative

items. The reasons why this study has employed a mixed-method approach are so as to give

EFL teachers the opportunity to state their personal opinions, beyond the options provided by

the researcher, and to provide a holistic and comprehensive view of the concept of teachers’

perceptions towards high-stakes examinations, teacher stress and what can be done.

Noting again that a growing body of previous studies has been focusing on the effects

washback of high-stakes examinations on student achievement, the current investigation is

providing researchers in the field of language testing the prospect of looking at the washback

of high-stakes examinations from the teachers’ perspective. Foremost, results from this study

will also contribute in finding ways in reducing the negative washback’s effects on teacher

stress. Another factor that makes this study important and original is the absence of empirical

research which focuses on the educational system of Cyprus, as well as the washback of the

Pancyprian Examinations.

1.3.Structure of the Study

There are a total of five chapters in this dissertation. Consequent to the Introduction, the

second chapter highlights aspects of the research that has been conducted on washback of

high-stakes examinations, psychological and teacher stress and the areas that are commonly

affected by test washback, and the effects these possible changes have on teaching, learning,

teachers and students. Furthermore in this chapter, a brief history of high-stakes

examinations, as well as a background on the educational system that currently exists in

Cyprus will be provided. In the end of the Literature Review, the importance of this study

will once more be stressed, and the research questions this paper will aim to answer will be

formulated.

Following in the third chapter of this paper, the methodological approach which was

implemented to answer the research questions formulated in Chapter 2 is described. Since the

aim is to collect data so as to see and comprehend the teachers’ opinions on the topic under


7

study as much and better as possible, the adoption of a mixed-method approach seemed more

appropriate. The reasons why this methodology was chosen will be fully explained in this

chapter, as well as the steps which were followed to conduct the web-based questionnaire,

including the piloting process, the sample that received the questionnaire and the ways

participants were recruited.

Chapter 4 is often characterized by many as the core of the contribution a researcher’s work

makes, and is consisted of the key findings the data collection has found, along with

substantive interpretation and discussion of what both quantitative and qualitative results

mean for the purposes of the present study. This chapter is the one that connects what was

said before about the notion of washback of high-stakes examinations and teacher stress, with

what was found by looking at the results, whether in harmony or counterpoint. As with any

other research, findings can sometimes provide the researcher with new issues that were not

meant to be addressed in this study. Thus, apart from the answers of the research questions

created at the end of the literature review, Chapter 4 is the one that can generate more

questions for further research.

The fifth and final chapter of this study offers a summary of the noteworthy findings and their

role to the implications of the present study, as well as what we have learned about language

testing more widely. No research is perfect, and therefore limitations are probably an

unavoidable part of this study and will be listed in the final chapter. Finally,

recommendations for future research within the area of washback and high-stakes

examinations will be suggested.

A full list of the sources used for supporting the purposes of the study, as well as any

appendices that were provided for the better understanding of the reader on different issues,

are available towards the end of the paper.


8

Chapter 2

Literature Review

2.1.Introduction

The purpose of the present literature review is to illustrate the empirical studies that already

exist on washback of high-stakes examinations, psychological and teacher stress, and the

areas that are hypothesized to be affected by test washback. Before beginning reviewing the

literature on these issues, a brief background on the history of high-stakes examinations and

on the educational system that currently exists in Cyprus will be provided. Then, a brief

review of stress as it is viewed in the psychological literature is essential, since stress is a

complex argument that needs an initial understanding before moving to the next section,

which emphasizes and explicitly examines teacher stress. What follows is an in-depth review

of the literature and studies that were conducted and focus on washback of high-stakes

examinations, including the affected areas. To conclude this chapter, the reasons why the

issue of teacher stress due to the washback of high-stakes examinations needs further

investigation and the research questions this dissertation aims to answer will also be

formulated.

2.2.Brief History of High-Stakes Examinations

Madaus (1988: 7) defines high-stakes examinations as “those whose results are seen – rightly

or wrongly – by students, teachers, administrators, parents, or the general public, as being

used to make important decisions that immediately and directly affect them.” Heubert and

Hauser (1999: 1) also state that high-stakes examinations “are increasingly seen as a means

of raising academic standards, holding educators and students accountable for meeting those

standards, and boosting public confidence in schools.” The term ‘high-stakes’ is not usually

used to describe the test, but the consequences it has on test takers. It is reported that this

adjective is derived from the vocabulary of gambling, where a ‘stake’ is the money the

players bid in a game. Similarly, high-stakes examinations entail uncertainty and potential

losses for the test takers, who have to pass the test in order to ‘win’ (Jones and Kim 2010).

The last century has been met with a lot of speculation about the time high-stakes

examinations were introduced for the first time, with some researchers relating this kind of

examinations with the desire of nations to prevail one another. Nichols and Berliner (2007)

for example argue that high-stakes examinations in the United States of America (USA) were


9

introduced almost a decade after the end of World War II (1939-1945), when the USA

engaged in a ‘space and arms’ race with Russia. According to Nichols and Berliner (2007), it

was believed that the American scientists were failing to compete with the Russians,

something that was confirmed in 1957, when the Soviet Nation succeeded in launching the

first artificial satellite, which was named ‘Sputnik.’ This historical event forced the

Americans to consider an educational reform, and the National Defense Education Act

(NDEA) was subsequently signed in 1958. The purpose of this Act was to enable school

administrators, and the government itself, to assess students through examinations that would

bring out the best students who had potential in becoming successful and bright scientists

(Ebert-Flattau et al. 2007).

Other authors however, such as Clarke et al. (2003), suggest that high-stakes examinations

originated long before any of the World Wars and with the invention of the first intelligence

test, widely known today as IQ test, by Alfred Binet in 1905. Moses and Nanna (2007) give

their own opinion, by believing that high-stakes examinations existed for over two centuries.

Notwithstanding the time high-stakes examinations were formed, it should be noted that at

that time students “could be denied a diploma if they did not pass the tests, but there were no

consequences for teachers or schools” (Nichols and Berliner 2007: 3).

2.3.School Accountability

Nowadays, standardized testing – a term that will be used interchangeably with high-stakes

testing – and school accountability are frequently being characterized as twins, since the

results of such examinations have a significant impact on a school’s performance and

reputation. However, this relationship is a rather new innovation that was introduced in the

USA in 1965, with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which goes by the

name No Child Left Behind (NCLB) since 2002 (Braden and Schroeder 2004), and in 1988

and 1992 in the UK, when the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher introduced the national

curriculum and John Major created the independent national inspectorate respectively (Reitan

2003).

Zachariou-Othonos (2000: 4) refers to accountability as a “mechanism that controls teachers’

work and roles and tests teachers’ effectiveness to meet the requirements of the system as

well as the requirement of the society.” It needs to be stressed, however, that accountability

does not exist to blame teachers for the conditions students were learning in the past; it exists

to measure a teacher’s ability to identify his or her students’ learning needs and difficulties


10

and plan their lessons accordingly, so as to meet those needs and promote student learning.

Apart from the evaluation of teachers, accountability based on the results of high-stakes

examinations is also used to measure student achievement and the ergonomics of school

buildings.

2.4.Advantages and Disadvantages of High-Stakes Examinations

It is true that high-stakes examinations have both advantages and disadvantages, but

Lattimore (2003) claims that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages, saying that

standardized tests can lead to several “unintended consequences” (Lattimore 2003: 57) to

students, parents, teachers and school administrators. Normally, in most countries data from

national high-stakes examinations become available for the public, and this serves as an

advantage for parents who are interested in learning how well, or poorly, the school their

children attend is performing. It is also suggested that although the exam itself and the

anticipation to learn how well a student did causes anxiety and tension, the results can benefit

students by learning how to control their stress levels and developing the necessary skills they

need to better themselves.

However, previous studies have shown that students tend to do poorer on high-stakes

examinations in comparison with low-stakes tests, such as in-classroom assessments, and that

they come to a point where they see their scores without improving their knowledge and

developing an understanding of what they have learned (Amrein and Berliner 2002; Harlen

and Deakin-Crick 2002; Diamond and Spillane 2004; Fredericks 2010). Moreover, high-

stakes examinations promote the school administrators’ need to enact policies that will

improve test scores but not learning. Stetcher (2002) also stresses that standardized tests

distract administrators from other issues and school needs, such as the maintenance of school

buildings and the modernization of school resources.

Another suspected consequence of high-stakes examinations is that they push any subject that

is not tested out of the classroom, with teachers who teach subjects of high-stakes’ importance

frequently asking teachers of other subjects to allow them to do test revision at their lessons’

allocated time. According to Perea-Jimenez (2008: 40-41), the legitimization of high-stakes

examinations and this discrimination between subjects lead teachers to feel “more and more

displaced and disrespected as professionals” and that “high-stakes testing was taking away

their priorities.” Lattimore (2003: 63) sums up four of the main disadvantages of high-stakes

examinations as follows:


11

They are relatively objective and are an impartial means of distributing

educational beliefs.

Preparation for high-stakes tests often overemphasizes rote memorization and

cramming by students and drill-and-practice as a teaching method.

The use of examinations for the dual purpose of certifying the completion of a

secondary education and for university admission puts those not bound for

college at a disadvantage.

Results of individual students are often used to serve a variety of purposes for

which they may not be designed.

2.5.The Educational System of Cyprus

The educational system in Cyprus consists of four stages: pre-primary, primary, the secondary

and higher education. Students are required to attend school from the age of three until the

age of fourteen when the lower secondary education (Gymnasium) ends, and the upper

secondary education (Lyceum) starts. Figure 2.5 below describes the progress of education in

Cyprus (Cyprus Ministry of Education and Culture 2013). As in every country, Cyprus has

both public and private schools, with 82.3% and 17.7% of students attending each sector

respectively. All public schools are funded exclusively by the state and follow the same

curriculum and use the same syllabus and textbooks, whereas each private school sets tuition

fees of its own and follows a different curriculum set by the school itself.

Figure 2.5: Cyprus' Educational System.


12

Although the Ministry of Education and Culture has the responsibility for oversight of both

public and private schools, it has no authority when it comes to teachers. An independent

body, called the Educational Service Commission, is appointed by the President of the

Republic of Cyprus for a period of six years, and has the responsibility of employing,

promoting and firing teachers who are added to a list after their graduation from higher

education. There are two main facts about these lists that need to be mentioned: 1) each

subject has its own list, and these lists are usually very long; the list of English teachers alone

has 1844 candidates, and 2) the Educational Service Commission, or anyone for that matter,

cannot hire teachers from the list based on qualifications, interviews, or suitability for a

particular post. This is because the order of candidates cannot be altered in any way, unless

they earn more qualifications and/or teaching experience. In the case of private schools,

administrators are free to select and hire teachers based on their qualifications and

personalities, notwithstanding their position on the lists.

High-stakes examinations do not really become an important part of students’ education until

the third and final year of Lyceum, when they have to prepare and pass the Pancyprian

Examinations, as they are widely known. Pancyprian Examinations are fairly new, being

introduced in 2006. Prior to that, and up until 2005, two different high-stakes examinations

were used, one called ‘the Common Examination’ for Apolytirion purposes, which was

mandatory for all students wishing to work in a governmental position, and the other called

‘the University Entrance Examination’ for those who wished to study at a public university in

either Cyprus or Greece. The use of the two examinations was very unpopular with parents

and teachers, since they were only a few days apart resulting in students having higher levels

of stress. Prior to Cyprus joining the European Union, Cypriot students had the privilege of

taking 7% of all university places in Greece, after succeeding at university entrance

examinations set by the government of Cyprus. In 2004, when Cyprus joined the European

Union, the Greek government informed the government of Cyprus that this privilege was no

longer valid and Cypriot students had to compete with any other European student who

wished to study in Greece (Lamprianou 2012). Therefore forces came to a head that led to the

creation of a single examination that is now used for both Apolytirion and University

Entrance purposes.

A final point before moving on is that league tables do not exist in Cyprus; at least not in the

way they are defined in other countries. When the official results of the Pancyprian

examinations are published on the official website of the Ministry of Education and

subsequently the local newspapers, journalists search and publish the top ten students, and the


13

schools they attended. However, a successful student from one school does not guarantee a

school’s excellent performance.

2.6. Psychological Stress and Outcomes

Fimian (1982: 101) defines stress as a “hypothetical construct” which characterizes a

balanced situation and the relationship between the person’s reactions to the demands of the

environment, and the environment itself. Lazarus (1990: 3) scientifically writes that

psychological stress is

a multivariate process involving inputs, outputs, and the mediating activities of

appraisal and coping; there is constant feedback from ongoing events, based on the

changes in the person-environment relationship, how it is coped with and, therefore

appraised.

Moving on to define the terms of appraisal and coping, Lazarus (1993: 6) describes the first as

“the process that mediates between, on the one hand, the demands, constraints, and resources

of the environment and, on the other, the goal hierarchy and personal beliefs of the

individual.” Coping refers to the alteration individuals make to the circumstances that

surround their stress, and how they interpret them so as to make them seem more positive

(Lazarus 1993: 8). Coping can be characterized as either emotion-focused or problem-

focused. When coping is emotion-focused, the individuals alter the way they construe the

threat that causes them stress, but without changing the threat itself, whereas a problem-

focused coping has as primary purpose to reduce stress by eradicating or modifying the

assessor (Folkman and Lazarus 1988; Lazarus 1993).

Travers and Cooper (1996) discuss that stress can be either positive or negative depending on

how each individual perceives it. They argue that stress “can up to a certain point be a

stimulant, and can have positive consequences […], but it is important that individuals can

find their optimal stress levels” (Travers and Cooper 1996: 13). In their study, Weinstein and

Ryan (2010) talk about the ways stress affects people at work, either positively or negatively.

Their findings showed that individuals who are given more autonomy privileges and less

controlling from the authorities experiences less tension at work, than employees felt pressure

while working under sever controlling circumstances.

As with any other emotion, stress is a complex system that is perceived by each individual

accordingly, depending on the environment they live in, their beliefs and attributes. If not

treated with caution, stress may have a significant impact on the individual’s constructive


14

thinking, which is defined as the ways people interpret and respond to specific events in their

lives (Epstein and Meier 1989). If stressed, an individual’s constructive thinking is replaced

by a number of emotional reactions, which may include “helplessness, insecurity,

vulnerability and inadequacy, general uneasiness, […] negative self-concept and low self-

esteem” (Travers and Cooper 1996: 23).

2.7. Teacher Stress

A number of studies (Darling-Hammond 2007; Berryhill, Linney and Fromewick 2009) agree

that teachers feel more stressed when preparing students for a high-stakes examinations.

However, there is still very little research that focuses explicitly on teacher stress and high-

stakes examinations. Kyriacou (2001: 28) defines teacher stress as “the experience by a

teacher of unpleasant negative emotions, such as anger, anxiety, tension, frustration, or

depression resulting from some aspect of their work as teacher.” Many teachers seem to

struggle to find their optimal stress levels due to factors that are perceived as threats to their

personal self-esteem and well-being. Such factors are outlined by Kyriacou and Sutcliffe

(1979) and include:

Poor career structure

Individual misbehaving pupils

Inadequate salary

Inadequate disciplinary policy of school

Noisy pupils

Trying to uphold/maintain standards

Too much work to do

In view of the above, O’Day (2002), as well as Ballet, Kelchermans and Loughran (2006)

observed that teachers work harder than before due to the fact that their work as teacher is

used as a measurement of accountability, and therefore this has as a result the increase of their

stress levels. Moreover, Brown, Davis and Johnson (2002) found in their study involving UK

teachers that one of the reasons why participants wanted to quit their teaching career was

because of their students’ troubling behaviour and discipline issues. It is highly argued that

the kind of relationship teachers have with their students plays an important role to whether

they will be stressed or not. If, for example, their relationship is negative and teachers feel

more stressed, this will probably exacerbate negative interactions between teachers and

students (Yoon 2002). On the other hand, O’Connor, Dearing and Collins (2011) observed

that positive and effective relationships between teachers and students will decrease the

former’s stress and lower the latter’s externalizing manners. With stress being significantly

correlated to student behaviour, studies have shown that a supportive network among teachers


15

and society can notably reduce teacher stress (Margolis and Nagel 2006; Bakker et al. 2007;

Seal, Sass and Martin 2010).

Past and more recent studies (Bandura 1982; Kyriacou 2001; Weinstein and Ryan 2010) made

it clear to other researchers that stress is recognized as a salient emotion that affects the

individuals’ beliefs. Thus, there is reason to hypothesize that along with the reported factors

mentioned by Kyriacou (2001) above, teacher stress can also have a significant impact on the

individual’s self-efficacy, i.e. “the belief in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the

courses of action required to manage prospective situations” (Bandura 1997: 2).

As it was previously mentioned, the outcomes of stress can be catastrophic for an individual,

who can feel depressed, anxious, inadequate and with their self-esteem levels subsequently

dropping (Travers and Cooper 1996). Similarly, these reactions translate to teachers as well.

A teacher is more likely to feel motivated to teach when is given autonomous privileges in the

classroom, and stray away from the notion of “teaching to the test,” which is defined as “the

practice of devoting extra time and attention in the classroom to the skills and knowledge that

will be assessed” on the high-stakes examination (Ravitch 2007: 213). A participant in

Richards’ study (2012: 299), which focused on US teachers, characteristically said:

My body is giving before my mind. I have no life other than teaching. Every night,

every weekend I’m grading, planning, communicating with parents. I’m never caught

up. I miss having a life.

2.8. Test Washback

Cheng, Watanabe and Curtis (2004: xiii) agree that “our education system is awash with

various high-stakes testing, be it standardized, multiple choice testing or portfolio

assessment.” It is widely known among researchers in the field of language testing and

education that this kind of examinations has significant consequences on both teaching and

learning, a phenomenon that is most commonly known as ‘test washback’ (Alderson and Wall

1993; Shohamy 1993; Bailey 1999; Cheng, Watanabe and Curtis 2004). However, Bailey

(1999: 3) claims that the definitions of washback are “nearly as numerous as the people who

write about it.” It was stated in chapter 1 that Heaton (1990: 16) informs that washback was

assumingly related to the quality of tests up until the 1990s, and that this is no longer valid, as

it is proved that there is not a linear connection between test design and teaching and learning.

In their model, Alderson and Wall (1993: 120-121, their emphasis) posit fifteen hypotheses

related to washback that do not necessarily relate to the design of a test, and that are discussed

directly and indirectly in this dissertation:


16

1. A test will influence teaching.

2. A test will influence learning.

3. A test will influence what teachers teach; and

4. A test will influence how teachers teach; and therefore

5. A test will influence what learners learn;

6. A test will influence how learners learn.

7. A test will influence the rate and sequence of teaching; and

8. A test will influence the rate and sequence of learning.

9. A test will influence the degree and depth of teaching; and

10. A test will influence the degree and depth of learning.

11. A test will influence attitudes to the content, method, etc. of teaching and

learning.

12. Tests that have important consequences will have washback; and conversely

13. Tests that do not have important consequences will have no washback.

14. Tests will have washback on all learners and teachers.

15. A test will have washback effects for some learners and some teachers, but

not for others.

In another model, which was proposed by Hughes (1993), three key mechanisms within the

washback process are identified: the participants, the processes and the products. As it is

observed in Figure 2.7, the participants include everyone who is involved in the effects of

language testing, i.e. students, teachers, parents, school administrators, materials developers

and publishers. Processes are the actions and decisions that participants must take and may

contribute to student learning. Finally, the products refer to the quality of learning and what

is learned. Bailey (1996), who provides the illustration in figure 2.1, argues that the quality of

the test may have an impact on the participants’ perceptions of the test and towards their

profession and learning. Subsequently, the participants’ views may affect their way of

teaching and learning, by focusing for example on the activities that will most likely be

included in the test and therefore influence the learning outcomes, i.e. the product (Bailey

1996). Please bear in mind that the figure below is followed from left to right.


17

2.9. Issues Associated with Washback and High-Stakes Examinations

Washback in language testing can have significant effects on various parts of a classroom,

such as the curriculum that is used during the school year, the materials and methods teachers

use to help students learn, learning itself and subsequently the results of a test, especially if it

is of a high-stakes importance.

2.10. Curriculum and Washback

Alderson and Wall (1993), Lam (1994) and Cheng (1997) have all drawn the conclusion that

examinations and curriculum have indeed a close relationship. Specifically, in their study on

the O’ Level English examination in Sri Lanka, Alderson and Wall (1993: 126-127) reported

that “the examination has had a demonstrable effect on the content of language lessons” since

teachers seemed to narrow the curriculum to areas which were more likely to be included in

the test. Similarly, Lam (1994) discovered in his study on the Use of English exam in Hong

Kong that lessons were focusing on the items carrying the most marks, while Cheng found out

that teachers were replacing regular classroom activities with activities that were more

appropriate with the content of the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (1997).

Figure 2.7.Bailey's model of washback.


18

Further studies have also shown that teachers feel it necessary to narrow the curriculum to the

areas which are most likely to be tested because of the added pressure they have so as to

produce the desired results their school administration wants to see (Clarke et al. 2003; Ryan

et al. 2005; Donnelly and Sadler 2009). This educational practice is widely known as

“teaching to the test”, which “requires teachers to direct their instruction toward a specific

body of content knowledge or a specific set of cognitive skills represented by a given test”

(Popham 2001: 16).

However, not everyone agrees with what the above researchers have discovered. Watanabe

(1996), for example, found that teachers who prepare students for the Japanese university

entrance examination do not necessarily teach skills that are included in the tested content

area, such as the skills of listening and writing. In another study, Shohamy, Donitsa-Schmidt

and Ferman (1996) compared two national tests, the one examining Arabic as a second

language and the other testing English as a foreign language. Results from their study showed

that although the content of teaching was not affected by the Arabic examination, the English

test “created major impact in terms of teaching activities, time devoted for test preparation,

production of new teaching material, etc” (Shohamy, Donitsa-Schmidt and Ferman 1996).

Other studies, such as Read and Hayes (2003), showed that washback on the curriculum

differed on each course of the IELTS preparation. While course A was an intensive and short

preparation course, course B was a general course familiarizing students with the IELTS

examination. Because of its intensive nature, it was predictable that teachers in Course A

would spend twice the time on technical issues, while teachers of Course B would have more

opportunities to balance their time accordingly for each skill.

2.11. Class Time, Size and Washback

Allocation of the class time and the size of a classroom are among the factors which are

affected by the washback effect and also influence high-stakes examinations, according to the

literature. What is suggested by Alderson and Hamp Lyons (1996) and Read and Hayes

(2003) is that class time allocation depends on the institution or school, and that the decision

teachers have to make on how much time they will spend on each subject affects their

methodology strategies. Writing about the class size, Alderson and Hamp Lyons (1996)

discovered in their study, which examined the differences between TOEFL preparation

classes and non-TOEFL preparation classes, that more students were attending the TOEFL

classes and less the non-TOEFL.


19

2.12. Teaching Materials and Washback

Another area that is affected by washback is the teaching materials teachers use to prepare

students for a high-stakes examination. Nearly every teacher knows about the existence of

teaching materials, including textbooks and the use of practice standardized tests, and this is

confirmed by Read and Hayes’ study which was conducted in New Zealand. In her study,

Cheng (1997) discovered that 68% of teachers believed that the new high-stakes examination,

that is the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (HKCEE), would most likely

make them feel more pressured, “with extra work to cope with and more teaching materials”

(Cheng 1997: 46). However, Cheng (1997: 46) stresses that “revised textbooks targeted

towards the new examination” were provided to every school which would accommodate the

HKCEE. Shohamy, Donitsa-Schmidt and Ferman (1996) observed that although “ample new

material” (p. 309) was published as soon as the changes for the EFL examination became

available to the public, “no special courseware...has been published since 1993” (p. 304) for

the Arabic as a second language test. Both Cheng’s and Shohamy, Donitsa-Schmidt and

Ferman’s studies show that there appears to be little question that there are more possibilities

for the teaching materials to be revised and generated if the exam is of high-stakes importance

than if the exam is of a lesser importance.

By observing teachers preparing students for the Use of English exam in Hong Kong, Lam

(1994: 91) discovered that teachers have the impression that “the best way to prepare students

for exams is by doing past papers.” He also describes teachers as “textbook [and] exam

slaves,” because of the majority’s need to rely on the use practice standardized tests. While

Alderson and Hamp-Lyon’s study on TOEFL and non-TOEFL preparation courses found that

many teachers relied on exam materials because of their negativity when the examinations

was getting near, which had as a result their discouragement from innovating their own

materials, a more recent study (Watanabe 2000: 44) discovered that teachers “tried to

innovate during exam preparation classes [by] using a variety of self-made materials.” The

variety of findings among the researchers indicates that the use of exam materials and

textbooks differs from teacher to teacher, and from institution to institution. \

2.13. Student Learning and Washback

This section would be deemed incomplete if the effects washback of high-stakes examinations

has on student learning was not mentioned. Student learning is the teacher’s supposed goal,

i.e. “the progress of learning in the group of individuals in their class or classes and their

ability as teachers to facilitate that progress” (Spratt 2005: 7-8). However, little has been


20

written about this area, with Wall (2000) arguing that what is missing from the field of

language testing research, concerning washback, is the systematic “analyses of test results

which indicate whether students have learnt more or learned better because they have studied

for a particular test” (p. 502).

Andrews, Fullilove and Wong (2002) attempted to measure two groups of students taking the

oral examination in Hong Kong. Although there was a difference between the groups who

had prepared for a maximum of two years, and the group who had not prepared for the test,

this difference was not significant enough so as to draw empirical conclusions. What

Andrews, Fullilove and Wong (2002) did next was that they tried to analyse the videotaped

data from the test, in order to determine the patterns in the students’ speech in terms of

organization and language (if you wish to read examples from their findings, some can be

found in Appendix A). Unfortunately, the results from their multifaceted study showed that

The sort of washback which is most apparent seems to represent a very superficial

level of learning outcome: with the exam format, and the rote-learning of exam-

specific strategies and formulaic phrases. Although one should hesitate to draw too

strong a conclusion from a fairly small data set, the inappropriate use of such

phrases by a number of students [...] seems indicative of memorisation rather than

meaningful internalisation. [...] In these instances, the students appear to have learnt

which language features to use, but not when and how to use them appropriately

(Andrews, Fullilove and Wong 2002: 221).

Similarly, Cheng (1998: 297) concluded that “the washback effect of this exam [HKCEE]

seems to be limited in the sense that it does not appear to have a fundamental impact on

students’ learning.” A more recent study, Shih (2007) showed that the General English

Proficiency Test of English Test (GEPT) in Taiwan “did not induce a high degree of

washback” (p. 155), but this according to Shih might have something to do with the fact that

the participants in his study were majoring in the English language, and therefore these results

still do not tell us anything significant about the effects of washback on learning. Thus, there

is not much that can be said on this issue at this point, as findings are still disparate, few and

need further investigation by other researchers.

2.14. Language Teachers and Washback

According to Bailey (1999: 16) “it is safe to say that teachers are the most frequently studied

of all the participants in the washback process,” and that is confirmed with the constant

reference to teachers by studies previously carried on washback, as well with six hypotheses

set by Alderson and Wall (1993) concerning teachers in language programs:


21

1. A test will influence teaching.

2. A test will influence what teachers teach; and

3. A test will influence how teachers teach.

7. A test will influence the rate and sequence of teaching; and

9. A test will influence the degree and depth of teaching

10. A test will influence attitudes to the content, method, etc. of teaching and

learning.

Two major studies (Clark 1983; Shohamy 1992) contradict each other on the possibilities of

positive and negative washback in relation with the teachers’ role. Shohamy, on her end,

argues for a gap that exists between external test constructors and the teachers who work in

schools. She specifically claims that “when the writing of tests does not involve those who

are expected to carry out the change – the teachers, [...] it is difficult to expect that tests will

lead to meaningful improvement in learning” (Shohamy 1992: 514). Clark, however, states

that this gap may be proved beneficial, since “it becomes possible for a variety of individuals

and groups”, whether they are teachers or external test developers, “to determine the

functional outcomes of instruction and to suggest possible further improvements in the

instructional process on the basis of the information obtained” (Clark 1983: 435).

Buck (1988: 17) argues that “there is a natural tendency for both teachers and students to

tailor their classroom activities to the demands of the test, especially when the test is very

important to the future of the students.” He stresses that the washback that occurs in these

circumstances can be either positive or negative. What strikes the most, however, is that

many studies make an important point that some teachers do not have a sound familiar with

the exam requirements and contents (Alderson and Wall 1993; Tsagari 2011), with Alderson

and Wall (1993: 67) sarcastically adding that “all teachers seem willing to go along with the

demands of the exam (if only they knew what they are).” Along with their findings, results

from Watanabe’s study show that teachers were purposely avoiding and refusing any training

for the test, since they believed that “actual English skills” (2000: 45) would be enough to aid

students to pass the test.

2.15. Teacher Stress, Test Washback, and Summary of the Literature

This chapter highlights the aspects of research that exists on high-stakes examinations, stress

and teacher stress, as well as test washback. Stress is defined as an extremely complex

relationship between a person and their environment (Lazarus 1990), while teacher stress

translates that environment to that of teaching. Teacher stress is a negative emotional reaction

to the fear that their profession may be proved a threat to themselves in some way (Kyriacou

2001). The review on empirical studies of washback indicates that one of the most important


22

influential agents in the process of washback and test preparation is the teacher, who has the

dilemma of what and how to teach in a way that can facilitate learning and help students to

pass the high-stakes examination.

However, there is no study in the literature that explicitly focuses on the effects of washback

of high-stakes examinations on teacher stress. Although empirical studies have been

conducted on these two issues separately, there is still a gap that needs to be filled, in order to

help researchers gather data from all the perspectives, including both students and teachers.

This is the point where the importance of the present study must be stressed. This study will

try and connect the notion of washback with the feeling of stress in teachers, through a mixed-

method research consisted of a web-based questionnaire. For the purposes of the

investigation, the following null hypothesis was formulated:

All teachers have the same beliefs about high-stakes examinations.

The data collected will have a key role in answering the following research questions:

1. To what extent does washback of high-stakes examinations influence teacher

stress in an EFL teaching environment?

2. What measures can be introduced to solve the issue of stress in teachers?


23

Chapter 3

Methodology

3.1.Introduction

What will be described in this chapter is the methodological approach that was employed so

as to investigate and answer the research questions formulated at the end of the previous

chapter. In order to examine the teachers’ perceptions on high-stakes examinations and

teacher stress, it was decided that a mixed-method design was best suited for the purposes of

this study. A mixed-method study integrates data collection techniques from both

quantitative and qualitative methods. A further discussion as to why a mixed-method was

preferred will be made in this chapter, bearing in mind the importance of carefully selecting

instruments in a way that they will guarantee ergonomic design and validity. Moreover, an

outline of the process that was followed to conduct and pilot the survey, to select the sample

recruited to participate in the study, as well as the steps that were followed to analyse the data

collected will be included. Finally, the way any possible ethical issues were addressed will be

mentioned here.

3.2. Mixed-Methods Research

The popularity of using mixed-methods research to collect data can be easily documented by

looking at articles, books, journals and any other kind of research. Greene, Caracelli and

Graham (1989: 256) gave an early definition for mixed-method designs, describing it as

“those that include at least one quantitative method (designed to collect numbers) and one

qualitative method (designed to collect words), where neither type of method is inherently

linked to any particular inquiry paradigm.” More than twenty years later however, mixed-

methods research has evolved to a point where it earned the status of “a separate

methodological orientation with its own worldview, vocabulary, and techniques” (Tashakkori

and Teddlie 2003: x).

For the purposes of the present investigation, a web-based questionnaire was conducted.

Although the research questions could possibly also be answered through the interview

process, a questionnaire was preferred because, “whereas interviews might be used effectively

with a few of the participants in language programs, a survey would be more effective for

obtaining the views of all the participants” (Brown 2001: 6). For complex issues such as

teacher stress and washback, it was believed that it would not be enough to interview a small


24

number of teachers, and this would also cause problems with the statistical significance.

Foremost, the recruitment of participants would be fairly easier with the use of web-based

questionnaires, and at a relatively low cost, since participants could choose to complete it in

their own personal time. Nonetheless, since the study primarily focuses on the teachers’

opinions and beliefs about stress and high-stakes examinations, it would not be appropriate to

exclude providing them with some open-ended items that would give participants the

opportunity to write their own comments on the topic under study. Hence, it can be said that

both quantitative and qualitative approaches were applied for the purposes of this paper, and

that is why it is called a mixed-method research.

3.3. Conducting and Piloting the Questionnaire

Questionnaires, as well as interviews and any other method for data collection, must be

treated with caution, so as to avoid any problems that may occur while conducting it and

recruiting participants. Therefore, three main anticipated problems were taken into

consideration, as these were pointed by Brown (2001: 6). He points that one of the risks of

sending a “self-administrated” survey, a survey completed by the participants “whenever and

wherever they like,” are that this kind of questionnaires are usually met with a low return rate.

The definition of a self-administrated questionnaire can be a risk itself, since the instructions

and items must be as clear as possible, since the researcher is not able to provide participants

with clarifications and unlike an interview, the researcher is not capable of knowing under

what circumstances the participants completed the questionnaire. Thus, the conduction of the

survey lasted for a period of three weeks, to make sure that these risks would be avoided as

much as possible. Stacey and Moyer (1982, cited in Brown: 2001: 8) recommended ten steps

a researcher can follow in order to conduct a successful survey:

1. Specifying survey objectives and research questions

2. Reviewing the literature

3. Defining abstract concepts

4. Selecting question formats

5. Selecting the statistical analysis

6. Writing the survey questions

7. Ordering the questions in the survey

8. Adjusting the physical appearance of the study

9. Preparing the cover letter and instructions

10. Validating the survey

Apart from the above steps, piloting the questionnaire before launching it was important so as

to make sure that participants would understand the questions and avoid receiving incomplete

surveys due to misinterpretation. Particularly, piloting the questionnaire would help identify


25

problems like, “unclear instructions,” “excessive length,” “ambiguity or lack of clarity in the

question wording,” similar or identical questions, “poor continuity” and answers to closed-

ended questions that are included in the ‘other’ boxes (McCormack and Hill 1997: 97).

A draft version, along with the consent form, was sent to three EFL teachers, who were asked

to provide feedback regarding the above possible problems. Whilst all three participants were

able to complete the first section that was asking some personal details, none of them was

able to proceed to the following sections because they did not know the meaning of the term

‘high-stakes examinations.’ Thus, a second draft version which included a simple definition

of the term had to be conducted and was once again sent to the same participants, in order to

give them the opportunity to complete the questionnaire. After fixing minor issues reported

by the participants, the survey was successfully launched and lasted for a period of one month

(July-August 2013). The consent letter, the questionnaire, as well as the link for the online

questionnaire are available in Appendices B and C respectively.

3.4. Structure of the Questionnaire

The web-based questionnaire was divided into three sections, with a total of 26 items. The

first section was asking participants to provide basic information about themselves, such as

gender, nationality, teaching experience, and other information related to their classrooms and

work as teacher. All questions in the first section were closed-ended. What followed in the

second section o the questionnaire were some questions relating to the participants’

experience with high-stakes examinations, as for an instance some open-ended questions

regarding their students’ reactions towards these examinations, as well as their teaching

practices when preparing revision material. The third and final section of the questionnaire

was inviting participants to select their level of agreement, or disagreement, on nine

statements which were set on a Likert scale. This section was also asking respondents to

select those statements that cause them teacher stress, along with the reasons why they chose

them and their recommendations as to what should be done to reduce this emotion are. The

second to last page was encouraging participants to add any further comments that they

thought would seem useful for the purposes of the current study. The first page of the

questionnaire included the consent message, while the last was thanking participants for their

participation.


26

3.5. Sample and Recruitment Procedures

The sample for this investigation was people who teach English as a Foreign Language in

America, China, Cyprus and Japan. In that way, it could be possible to make a comparison by

using the beliefs and opinions of teachers from different educational backgrounds to

determine if there are any differences among practices and the way teachers perceive stress.

The sample included teachers from the private, public and higher education sector, from one

to over thirty years of teaching experience. Moreover, schools of both low and high

performance were sought, so as to be able to work with data that represent all aspects of the

teaching population.

As it was mentioned earlier, recruitment for the present study lasted from the early days of

July 2013 until the first week of August 2013. The primary vehicle through which

participants were invited to complete the questionnaire was e-mail recruitment. Snowball

sampling was also adopted, so as to attract as many participants as possible. Snowball

sampling is analogous to the definition of a real snowball, which “is rolled along in wet,

sticky snow [and] picks more snow and gets larger” (Monette et al. 2011: 147). It is a non-

probability sampling technique, which is used in instances “when the members of a special

population are difficult to locate” (Babbie 2012: 200). Since the initial plan for this study was

to collect data from countries out of the UK and Cyprus, snowball sampling seemed a sensible

technique for this purpose. Participants were kindly asked in the recruitment e-mail to

forward it to peers and colleagues who met the criteria set by the researcher.

3.6. Introduction of Accommodations

As with any other research, some issues that were not foreseen when conducting the

questionnaire emerged and some accommodations had to be introduced, so as to help teachers

complete the questionnaire. Specifically, some EFL teachers from Cyprus conducted me

using the details provided in the recruitment letter and requested that I provide them with a

translated version of the questionnaire. The reasons why this accommodation was requested

were because some participants were of an advanced age and had not practiced English in a

long time, since they were pensioners. Thus, they believed that they would better understand

the questions if they were in Greek. Although it was unclear whether these accommodations

had an impact upon how participants responded to questions, it was the only way to deliver

the questionnaire to these teachers. A total of five teachers requested the Greek questionnaire,

and the total n-size was 85. The translated version of the questionnaire is available upon

request.


27

Another accommodation that had to be applied was due to the lack of internet skills of some

teachers, again in Cyprus. Four participants, who were conducted by other teachers through

the snowball sampling, said that they could not access the questionnaire, since they did not

know how to use electronic mail. Unfortunately, it was not feasible to provide them with a

physical version of the questionnaire, since the participants lived in other provinces. Instead,

it was suggested that the questionnaire was read aloud during a phone call. Again, it was not

possible to determine whether this way of completing the questionnaire affected the

participants’ responses and therefore all data collected from the teachers who received

accommodations were treated separately and cautiously.

3.7. Data Analysis Procedure

A series of systematic and methodical measures were followed to analyse the data collected

from the questionnaires. The first step was the coding of the quantitative data collected. Due

to time restraints and the risk of missing data that could lead to negative consequences for the

validity of the results, any thoughts of manually coding the responses had to be abandoned.

Instead, data were first collected in the website that was hosting the questionnaire, that is.

Bristol Online Surveys, and then exported to SPSS, a statistical package software. However,

since SPSS can only be used for frequencies and other numeric details, a different process had

to be followed for the open-ended items. In order to be able and code qualitative data, the

categorization of ‘unique’ and most frequent words or sequences was necessary, and coding

was done with the use of the Bristol Online Surveys website.

3.8. Addressing Ethical Issues

The addressing of ethical issues for the present study was followed in accordance with the

guidelines provided by the British Educational Research Association (BERA). The protection

of the data, as well as the protection of the participants’ privacy, confidentiality was

guaranteed throughout the process of data collection. Participants were first informed via a

recruitment letter about the purposes of the present study and the contents of the

questionnaire. It was stressed that their participation was entirely voluntary and that they

were not forced to complete the questionnaire if they were not interested or they felt

uncomfortable. It was also highlighted that participants were to remain anonymous and their

data would be heavily secured at a place where only I could use it for academic purposes

only.


28

3.9. Demographics and Focus Change

Although a record of how many teachers received the recruitment e-mail was not kept, the

numbers ranged between 150 and 170. The total number of respondents, including

incomplete surveys, was 102. Out of this total, 17 surveys were incomplete, resulting in a

final n of 85 EFL teachers (all demographic information on the participants can be found in

Table 3.9). In order to be able to categorize participants according to their nationality, an

appropriate item was generated on the questionnaire. Of the total 85 teachers, 64 (75.3%)

were Cypriots, 8 (9.4%) recognized themselves as British, 3 (3.5%) were identified as

Chinese, 1 (1.2%) were Americans, and 1 (1.2%) of Japanese origin. Again, 8 (9.4%)

answers were missing. It is understandable that all research changes, because the researcher

cannot foresee what is going to happen when it comes to data collection, especially when they

are collected with the aid of a questionnaire. With these small sample sizes from the UK,

China, the USA and Japan, it is not possible to use their responses and draw conclusions

about the whole population, as results from such small numbers are especially problematic

because we are not able to determine whether they are ‘strange’ or ‘typical.’ Therefore, the

data above is provided solely for information purposes as the study will from now on be based

only on data collected for the Cypriot educational system. Data was therefore cross tabulated

against the item which was asking the participants’ nationality, so as to gather all answers

from Cyprus. Foremost, to guarantee validity of the data, answers were also cross tabulated

against the age groups participants were teaching since the Pancyprian Examinations, for

which information is provided in chapter 2, apply for students between 17 and 18 years old,

which the final grade of lyceum. After the cross tabulation was completed, it was determined

that the new and final n-size was 64.

Of the new total sample, 43 (67.2%) were identified as females and 21 (32.8%) reported that

they were males. All 64 teachers were teaching English as a Foreign Language, and they

were employed in Cyprus.

Of the total 64 EFL teachers, 24 (37.5%) reported that they had 6-10 years of teaching

experience, 19 (29.7%) had 1-5 years, 15 (23.4%) had 11-15 years, 26-30 or more than 30

years of teaching experience, 4 (6.2%) had 16-20 years, while 2 (3.1%) participants had 21-25

years of teaching experience.

The majority of the teachers (29; 46%) were working in the public sector, while 14 (22.2%) in

the private. Eight participants (12.7%) were private tutors, and a total of 10 teachers (15.9%)


29

worked in either universities or colleges. Two participants (3.2%) did not answer this

question.

Of the total 64 teachers, 31 (49.2%) reported that they have an average of 15-25 students in

their classroom, 20 (31.7%) selected that they have no more than 15 students in their

classroom, while a total of 12 (19%) participants reported that they have either 26-35 or over

35 students in their classroom. One participant did not answer this question.

Table 3.9: Section I, Demographic ata/frequencies/percentages n %

What is your nationality? American

British Chinese

Cypriot Japanese

1

8 3

64 1

1.2

9.4 3.5

75.3 1.2

Cross tabulated data n %

What is your gender? Male Female

21 43

32.8 67.2

How many years of teaching experience do you have? 1-5

6-10 11-15

16-20 21-25

26-30 More than 30

19

24 5

4 2

5 5

29.7

37.5 7.8

6.2 3.1

7.8 7.8

In what kind of teaching environment do you work in? Private school

Public school

University College

Private Tutoring

14

29

7 3

8

22.2

46

11.1 4.8

12.7

On average, how many students are in your class? Under 15 15-25

26-35 More than 35

20 31

8 4

31.7 49.2

12.7 6.3


30

Chapter 4

Findings and Discussion

4.1.Introduction

The aim of the present dissertation was to examine the washback of high-stakes examinations

on the perceptions of EFL teachers about stress which is hypothesized to be caused by these

examinations. Due to the turn of events described in chapter 3, the research questions had to

be slightly altered as to apply to the results collected from the data. Thus, the two research

questions this chapter will discuss are as follows:

1. To what extent does washback of the Pancyprian Examinations influence teacher

stress in an EFL classroom in Cyprus?

2. What measures can be introduced to solve the issue of stress in Cypriot EFL

teachers due to the washback of the Pancyprian Examinations?

This chapter presents the findings of the questionnaires with a substantive discussion of what

these findings truly mean, in reference to the above research questions. Although at first the

findings and their discussion would be contributed into two separate chapters, it was decided

to merge them together, as it was very unnerving to have all this data with no interpretation.

Moreover, as it was stated in the introduction of this paper, the discussion of the findings is

considered as one of the most important chapters a researcher writes, as it is the one that

compares his or her personal investigation with what has been said before about the issues

under study, and determines whether it agrees or disagrees with what previous researchers

have studied and discovered. The following paragraphs explore and discuss each research

question, before drawing a general conclusion about the washback of the Pancyprian

Examinations on teacher stress.

Since the majority of items associate with each other, this chapter will try and combine both

quantitative and qualitative data when appropriate, especially when a quantitative question

was followed by a qualitative one, seeking more information from the participants. The

demographic data that were presented in chapter 3 constitute Section I of the questionnaire.

The second section aimed to explore the participants’ involvement in high-stakes test

construction and preparation (all the data from section II can be found gathered in Table 4.2).

4.2. Influences of Washback of Test Construction and Preparation

When teachers were asked whether they had ever participated in the construction of a

standardized test, 44 (68.8%) replied ‘Yes’, while 20 (31.3%) selected ‘No’. This is a


31

significant response rate, since those teachers’ responses reflect their experiences from

conducting a Pancyprian Examination paper. A participant wrote that

The process of choosing the content of the exam is very stressful, so as the test will

be neither too easy nor to difficult, so students of all performances can do well

depending on their abilities.1

To avoid any misunderstandings, it needs to be stressed that teachers who currently work in

schools are not allowed to participate in the construction or know the content of the exam but

only the day of the actual examination. However, the people who prepare the final

examination are teachers, who are appointed at the beginning of the school year by the

Ministry of Education and Culture. These teachers are not employed until one day before the

examination takes place. The preparation of the Pancyprian Examination paper is of extreme

secrecy, with constructors being isolated in a secret place guarded by police forces, without

the possibility of conducting anyone before the time of the examination. In this way, cheating

by school administrators and teachers is avoided to the maximum. Nowhere in the literature

exists anything that suggests any other educational system following the same procedure. In

fact, Phelps (2011) reports that a document that details the test’s design, its purpose and what

kind of items will be included, i.e. “the blueprint scam” (Phelps 2011: 41) is often published

by some states in the USA, forcing teachers to come across a “moral dilemma” (Phelps 2011:

41) and decide whether to help their students cheat in the exam or not.

Forty nine participants (77.8%) reported that they prepare students for the Pancyprian

Examinations. From those participants, 45 (70.4%) selected that they start revision for the

examination no longer than a month before. This is probably because teachers are not

informed about the material that is going to be tested in the examination until then. Still, the

majority of the participants argue that the curriculum is not narrowed enough with a teacher

writing that “the preparation for the exams, and to succeed in teaching the entire syllabus until

then, can often be characterized as a race.” Another participant claimed that,

Because there is no way of knowing the exact content of the exam, we as teachers

have to organise our time appropriately, and focus on the content we think will be

included by looking at past examination papers.

These statements come in agreement with Richards’ study (2012), which focused on a topic

similar to the present investigation and argued that participants felt drained from the amount

of work they have to achieve in a small period of time. However, the findings speak in

counterpoint to what the late Minister of Education and Culture said in a statement when the

PE were first introduced in 2005, that “the aim must be to [...] distribute the marks within a

test in such a way so that they will correspond to the teaching time spent on each topic in the

1 It should be noted that despite errors in direct quotations from participants, they were kept as they were made by the

respondents.


32

classroom [...]” (cited in Lamprianou 2012: 12). From the findings of the study, it is observed

that these guidelines were mainly written for bureaucratic purposes, as teachers feel that there

is not enough time to prepare students for all the topics set by the Ministry.

4.3. Influences of Washback on Teaching Practices and School Performance

When invited to select whether their teaching changes during preparation for the Pancyprian

Examinations, 39 (61.9%) participants selected ‘Yes.’ A follow-up question was created to

invite participants to explain in what ways their teaching changes. The majority replied by

saying that they “pay more effort on skills that students may be tested for,” and are “focused

on the requirements for passing the test.” Another participant wrote that, “I have to spend

more time and attention on the specific items on the exam,” while another said, “We

concentrate on the types and questions which will come up in the exam and nothing much

else.” This echoes a number of studies, such as Alderson and Wall (1993), Lam (1994),

Cheng (1997) and Zastrow and Zanc (2009), who reported that teachers spent more time

practicing material that will most likely be included in the exam.

A significant number of respondents reported that their students feel more stressed when the

PE approach, and that a number of students are stubborn with no motivation to study. Forty

one (64.1%) EFL teachers selected that this reaction affects their teaching, mostly negatively.

A participant in the study explicitly written that

It’s very difficult to work with students who are not willing to cooperate and who

don’t, or won’t, face the situation as seriously and responsibly as they should. The

amount of stress and pressure the teacher feels is equally frustrating and matters get

worse when you know that no amount of effort on the part of the teacher is enough

to make a difference, if not accompanied by the equal amount of effort on the part

of the student.

These findings agree with previous studies which focused on troubling student behaviours

(Brown, Davis and Johnson 2002; Yoon 2002), arguing that negative relationships and

insufficient cooperation between teachers and students can have direct and harmful impact on

both sides’ stress levels, as well as on the students’ test results.

The final question of section II requested that participants select their school’s performance in

the Pancyprian Examinations. The majority selected an average performance (48; 75%),

while 9 (14.1%) reported that their school’s performance was above average. Seven

participants (10.9%) reported that their school performs below the average score in the

Pancyprian Examinations. A follow-up question was created, asking participants who


33

selected ‘below average’ to explain why they thought that is. A participant in the study wrote,

“There are a series of structural issues regarding school organisation that deeply affect the

students' performance,” without however going into more depth about what these ‘structural

issues’ truly are. Another participant argued that,

The educational system in Cyprus is structured in such way, that it’s easier for

students to pass the final examination. If for example they have grades between A

and C during the school year, they only have to write their name on the

examination paper and that’s it; they get an Apolytirion. I don’t believe it’s the

students’ fault, but the fault of the system which fails to make students to actually

fear they may not pass. That’s why my school’s performance is poor.

Unfortunately, due to the small number of participants who selected that their school’s

performance is below average, further conclusions cannot be drawn from the findings of this

study. Nonetheless, even though the existing evidence from this data is not enough, it is still

suggested that this issue needs further investigation and that it may be proved as a salient

factor which has an impact on teacher stress and student performance.

Table 4.2: Section II, High-stakes Test Preparation /Frequencies/Percentages

N

%

Do you participate, or have you ever participated, in the construction of a high-

stakes test?

Yes

No

44

20

68.8

31.3

Do you prepare, or have you ever prepared, students to take a particular high-stakes test?

Yes No

49 15

77.8 23.5

How long before the test do you start preparation? 3 weeks

1 month 2 months

3 months 4 months

5 months 6 months

30

15 9

7 3

0 0

46.9

23.5 14.1

11 4.7

0 0

Does your teaching change when you engage in high-stakes testing preparation? Yes

No

46

18

71.9

28.2

Does their [students] reaction affect your teaching, either positively or negatively?

Yes No

41 23

64.1 35.9

How would you describe your school's performance on high-stakes tests? Below

average Average

Above average

7

48 9

10.9

75 14.1

4.4. Influences of Washback on Teacher Pressure

As it was mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, section III of the questionnaire consisted

of 9 statements to which participants were invited to either agree or disagree with. Before

starting analyzing the results, each statement was tested using the Chi-Square test, with a

significant level of 0.05, to determine whether the data were normally distributed and


34

examine the null hypothesis formulated at the end of the literature review. The results

showed that for all statements the null hypothesis, that ‘All teachers have the same beliefs

about high-stakes examinations,’ was rejected, warranting further analysis (please see Table

4.3).

Table 4.3: Chi-Square Test

Number of

Statement

Null Hypothesis Test Sig. Decision

16 The categories of Pressure occur with equal probabilities.

One-Sample Chi-Square Test .000

Reject the null hypothesis.

17 The categories of Content occur with equal probabilities.

One-Sample Chi-Square Test .000 Reject the null hypothesis.

18 The categories of Reputation occur with equal probabilities.


19 The categories of Materials occur with equal probabilities.


20 The categories of Parents occur with equal probabilities.


21 The categories of Study occur with equal probabilities.


22 The categories of Consequences occur with equal probabilities.


23 The categories of Blame occur with equal probabilities.


24 The categories of Questions occur with equal probabilities.


It is suggested by now that a significant number of teachers agree that the Pancyprian

Examinations can lead to severe distractions regarding their work; distractions that may result

in the increase of their stress levels. The findings from the final section of the questionnaire

are in agreement with studies conducted by previous researchers, such as Barrett (2009),

Willis and Haymore-Sandholtz (2009) and Richards (2012). Means and standard deviations

of the data in Section III can be found in Table 4.4. The majority of the participants agreed or

strongly agreed (49; 76.6%) with the statement ‘You feel more pressured because you must

make sure students pass the test.’ This statement was also selected by 49 participants, who

represent the 76.6% of the total sample, when asked to select the statements which added to

their stress levels. Invited to give a reason why they felt additional pressure, the majority

claimed that it would have a direct and negative impact on them as teachers, with a teacher

specifically writing, “Because if they failed the test, this would mean that I failed as a

teacher.”

While analysing the data, I attempted to test whether perceptions about stress differ according

to the teachers’ teaching experience. To determine the correlation between the years of

teaching experience and the stress experienced by teachers, a Pearson Correlation test was

carried out with a result of 0.143. This shows a weak correlation between years of experience


35

and stress experienced by teachers. It can therefore be concluded that the years of experience

are not strongly related to the stress experienced by teachers. These results agree with Samad

et al. (2010) who discovered that teacher stress among primary teachers in Malaysia is not

significantly associated with their teaching experience, but disagree with Sabanci’s (2011),

whose study on teachers in Turkey showed that participants with a teaching experience of 11

to 15 years feel more stressed than teachers who have been in the teaching profession for

more than 16 years.

In relation to what was said earlier about the changes teachers make in the classroom when

they prepare students for the PE, 29 participants (45.4%) agreed and 21 (32.9%) strongly

agreed with the statement ‘Your school treats tested content areas as more important than

non-tested content areas.’ Forty nine teachers (76.6%) reported that this statement causes

them stress, with some participants echoing Perea-Jimenez (2009), whose results showed that

“authentic teaching and learning strategies were pushed to the side” (p. 40), by saying that

Because my school treats areas that are most likely to be tested as more important,

I have to prepare extra teaching materials to cover the time I would normally

spend on other, less important subjects. However, this also serves as an advantage

for me. If the time for both tested and non-tested areas was equally distributed,

there is no way I would be able to teach everything! The syllabus they

supposedly give us at the beginning of the school year honestly serves as a

decoration and nothing more.

The above quote validates the results of the statement ‘You spend hours preparing teaching

materials for test preparation’, with which agreed or strongly agreed 52 of the 64 participants

(81.25%). The same statement was also selected by 49 (76.6%) participants as one that

causes them stress in the classroom. A strong positive correlation (r=0.662) between the

statements ‘Your school treats tested content areas as more important than non-tested content

areas’ and ‘You spend hours preparing teaching materials for test preparation’ suggested

that participants who agree that tested content areas are more important are more likely to

spend more hours to prepare their own teaching materials for revision purposes.

4.5. Influences of Washback on the Ways English is Taught in Cyprus

English as a Foreign Language in Cyprus is taught for a minimum of 90 to a maximum of 180

minutes per week in public schools. Students and their parents can also decide whether the

first should take external, private lessons, at what are called in Cyprus ‘Frontistiria’.

However, it should be noted that what students learn at school is completely different from

what they learn in the Frontistiria. Whilst schools prepare students for the Pancyprian

Examinations, and the syllabus is more or less the same in every grade, the Frontistiria


36

prepare students for other high-stakes examinations, such as IGCSE, and teach English

systematically over a period of minimum six years. Thus, due to the small amount of time

that is given for EFL in schools, administrators do not spend a lot of money on textbooks and

exam material. To support this, a participant in the study said that, “Due to not enough

funding for resources, I tend to work outside school hours preparing material that will aid the

children's understanding.” Unfortunately, this also confirms that Cyprus falls in the category

of “many schools [which find it] increasingly difficult to replace old books, equipment and

furniture, to implement curricular change, and to respond to planned changes in assessment

and examination procedures” (HMI 1986).

When it comes to the way English is taught in Cyprus, teachers follow a more grammar-

translation approach. The target language is primarily used to explain the forms of the

English tenses, or to learn new vocabulary and give examples. There is no obligation from

the students’ part to only speak English in the classroom and the only exposure they have to

the language is when they do exercises from the coursebook, write an in-classroom test, or

when they prepare for the Pancyprian Examinations by solving past papers. If learning

English is a matter of only passing the subject, then the concentration of students and teachers

on revision and practice of previous examination papers serves this purpose perfectly, and it is

right to accept that all students, parents, teachers and administrators will probably agree with

this practice. However, as Alderson and Hamp-Lyons (1996: 285, paraphrased in Spratt

2005: 12) said in their study, foreign students from the East and Latin America, who were

preparing from the TOEFL examination in the USA, suggested that the best way to learn

English and prepare for the examination was by “having American friends, going to the

movies, reading a lot and generally using English outside class.” Parents and teachers in

Cyprus, and perforce students, have the false impression that the study of past examination

papers serves as test preparation, when the true, sole purpose of the past papers is to

familiarize the students with the test items.

Although it is understandable that the importance of passing tests is not ignored, the

importance of students learning the language not only to pass the examination, but also for

personal growth, which according to Aristotle is a result of eudemonia and phronesis, is

equally, if not more, important, and is more likely to result in higher examination grades since

student will be able to explain and write an essay in a way they understand it, without

stressing over forgetting a specific word they memorized when preparing for the test.


37

The findings from this study show and confirm that teachers have no or very little say in the

process that is made to theoretically enhance student learning. Teachers have to follow a set

syllabus and methodology set by the Ministry of Education and Culture, and a philosophy that

is dictated by the entire system, which has as primary concern the confirmation that students

will pass the examination. Subsequently, it aims to secure a school’s reputation, without

considering the fact that this may add to a teacher’s stress levels.

4.6. Influences of Washback on Teachers’ Perceptions About School Reputation

When participants were asked to decide to what extent they agree or disagree with the

statement ‘The school administration highlights the importance of maintaining or improving

the school’s reputation,’ 47 (73.5%) of the 64 EFL teachers reported that they agree or

strongly agree with it. The fifty percent of the total sample, that is 32 teachers, later selected

the same statement among the ones they cause them teacher stress. When they were asked to

provide a reason why the importance of maintaining or improving a school’s reputation

causes them stress, the majority said that

There is an incessant pressure that we as teachers have the responsibility of

securing our school’s reputation, but they don’t really understand that there are

many practical problems and the true meaning of the phrase ‘Συν Αθηνά και χείρα

κίνει’ [the English ‘God helps those who help themselves’].

When then invited to give a possible solution for the pressure they receive for the school’s

reputation, and a solution that will reduce their stress levels, many participants proposed that

“all teachers who are not competent enough to meet the requirements of an efficient teacher

should quit this profession and seek for another job!” In this way, they argue, “school

administrators would not demand the improvement of the school’s reputation, as only truly

qualified teachers would prepare students for the examinations and subsequently have better

results.” The procedure of selecting teachers to work in public schools was described at the

early stages of the literature review. This procedure is important for understanding how

participants look at the relationship between examination scores and the reputation of a school

because many teachers related the incompetence of some teachers to the schools’ failure to

maintain or improve their performance.

OELMEK (1998), the Association of Secondary Schools’ Teachers of Cyprus, writes in a

statement that school administrators look at inspections and evaluations of teachers for the

purposes of accountability, controlling in this way the quality of resources in education and

more particularly the quality of teachers. However, the inability of the Educational Service

Commission to terminate a teacher’s service if it is ineffective, due to the existence of the so


38

called ‘waiting lists’, has a serious impact on the school’s public image, and especially on the

students’ performance on the Pancyprian Examinations. What is striking, is that nowhere in

the literature exists anyone to suggest that ‘waiting lists’ or a similar way of hiring teachers is

in operation in other countries (Κυριακίδου 2012), apart from Greece where the same system

was in operation until 1998, when they proposed a new way of hiring teachers through a

competition.

4.7. Influences of Washback on the Relationships Between Teachers and Parents

Apart from their rapport with students, participants in this study made it a salient point that

their relationship with the students’ parents can also affect their stress levels negatively or

positevly, depending on the relationship. Teachers’ responses were dichotomous when

presented with the statement ‘The students' parents understand that you put a lot of effort in

test preparation,’ with half of the participants selecting a neutral position (32; 50%) and the

other half agreeing with this statement (32; 50%).

Later, when teachers were asked to select whether they agree or disagree with the statement

‘You are the one to blame if students do not pass the test,’ 43 (67.2%) participants disagreed

or strongly disagreed with the statement, 22 (34.4%) were neutral, while only 9 participants

(14.1%) agreed with it.

Towards the end of the questionnaire, when participants were asked to select the statements

that cause them teacher stress, 47 (73.5%) of the 64 EFL teachers selected the statement ‘The

students' parents understand that you put a lot of effort in test preparation,’ and 51 (79.7%)

selected the statement ‘You are the one to blame if students do not pass the test.’

What is surprising from the above findings (look at the last three paragraphs), is that when

asked to explain why these two statements cause them stress, the majority of the participants

argued that “many parents do not understand how much effort we put in the classroom; for

them, their children’s failure is the teacher’s fault first and the student’s second.” Another

said that

When it comes to English in Cyprus, parents have the false impression that their

children need to pass exams from a younger age. This has as a result to follow a

more exam oriented syllabus rather than focus on skills and individual needs. The

schools say you have to teach this and that (ex. grammar-conditionals/passives)

even if the students did not understand simpler things (present tense). So we end

up rushing to finish the exam material because we do not have time to go over a

topic again.


39

Therefore, while findings from this study partially show that many teachers cannot really

determine whether parents understand their efforts or not, they eventually feel that the

responsibility of their students’ future is in their hands, something that consequently adds to

their teacher stress. This study apparently comes in agreement with what Keyes (no date:

108) said, that

As teachers think about their work with parents and families, they often have

mixed feelings. There are good feelings of shared efforts and mutually valued

achievement with some parents; while with others, there is a sense of frustration,

helplessness, or even anger over conflicting perceptions and understandings.

Findings from the statements, ‘Your students do not study at home because they understand

everything you teach them during test preparation,’ ‘You constantly remind students that

there are negative consequences if they do not pass a high-stakes test,’ and ‘Your students are

not afraid to ask you questions regarding the contents of a high-stakes test’ were not

significant to suggest that they cause stress to the participants. However, some participants

expressed their worries regarding the first statement presented in this paragraph, writing that

“I don’t control what students do when they leave my classroom,” while another said,

“Parents need to make sure students study at home, since it would be a pity to risk repeating

the whole school year,” relating this quote to the example a participant earlier said about how

marks are distributed. Finally, a participant said she feels more stressful if students who have

learning disabilities do not ask questions in the classroom, making her believe that “I may not

be good at my job, as it seems I can’t earn their trust.”

Table 4.4: Section III, Means, N sizes and standard deviations

Pressure1 Content

2 Reputation

3 Materials

4 Parents

5 Study

6 Consequences

7 Blame

8 Questions

9

Mean

2.16 2.04 1.96 2.00 2.49 3.25 2.29 3.60 1.59

N

76 76 75 75 75 75 76 75 76

Std. Deviation

1.096 .944 .907 .915 .828 1.067 1.105 .870 .851

1 You feel more pressured because you must make sure students pass the test.

2 Your school treats tested content areas as more important than non-tested content areas.

3 The school administration highlights the importance of maintaining or improving the school's reputation.

4 You spend hours preparing teaching materials for test preparation.

5 The students' parents understand that you put a lot of effort in test preparation.

6 Your students do not study at home because they understand everything you teach them during test preparation.

7 You constantly remind students that there are negative consequences if they do not pass a high-stakes test.

8 You are the one to blame if students do not pass the test.

9 Your students are not afraid to ask you questions regarding the contents of a high-stakes test.


40

4.8. Recommendations to Reduce Teacher Stress

In order to be able to provide recommendations that reflect the teachers’ perceptions,

participants were invited to suggest ways in which they believed their stress can be reduced.

Although there were several suggestions, participants did not go any further to recommend

how these can be applied in practical terms. This section of the chapter aims to build on the

participants’ suggestions, by proposing practical ways which can be examined by anyone

these may concern.

From the overall findings, the majority of the participants believe that what Cyprus needs is

an educational reform, which is accepted by studies (Pearson 1988; Shohamy 1992) as one of

the issues that can be influenced by test washback. Some of the participants explicitly argued

that “There is something wrong with our educational system and change MUST be made”

(participant’s emphasis).

Participants in this study expressed their longing, to change the way teachers in Cyprus are

employed. It needs to be stressed again that there is no record of any other country in Europe,

America or Asia that uses such lists apart from Cyprus. Some may say that when this

procedure was implemented in the 1960s, the purpose was not to allow the existing

Government to hire relatives, supporters, or close colleagues into schools regardless of their

qualifications. Although at first it may seemed like a practical way of selecting teachers, with

new graduates knowing that they will eventually get hired without having to go through an

interview process. As it was expected, however, during the course of time the lists became

endless. Nowadays, the average age of teachers who are now invited to teach is between 40

and 50 years old (Hazou 2008). Thus, from their early twenties until their midlife, teachers

do not have any experience from teaching into classrooms, except of course if they open their

own private Frontistiria, or get hired into the private sector. Last but not least, even though

the existing hiring system has been established by the society as objective, many participants

find it ‘unfair,’ since the selection is not made based on their qualifications, but based on the

number they hold on the list.

The Education Service Commission has regularly stated that proposals are submitted to the

Cyprus Ministry of Education and Culture for over twenty five years, with no response and

anything to suggest that authorities take into consideration these proposals. What is

surprising though is that the Ministry of Education in Greece stopped using appointment lists

almost a decade ago and now teachers are employed through a process of examinations. A

participant in the study wrote about “the fear or inability of the Ministry of Education to obey


41

to the new standards of modernization.” What this study recommends, is that it is time to

overcome this fear and, instead of creating and expanding the gap that exists between our

educational system and the educational systems of other countries, it is time to accept that

many factors have affected the existing system since the implementation of these lists and

change is bound to happen. The Ministry of Education, in cooperation with the Education

Service Commission and the Parliament, should eventually abandon and abolish the

appointment lists, and adopt the selection process of other countries, such as Greece, Portugal,

Romania and others, which employ teachers through high-stakes examinations. In this way,

candidates will be selected based on their personal qualities and skills and subsequently the

quality of teaching and learning in schools will be improved.

Another suggestion that was made by the majority of participants was to “narrow the

examination syllabus.” As it was presented from the findings, many respondents expressed

their complaint that there is not enough time to teach the syllabus and prepare students for the

Pancyprian Examinations on time. It was mentioned earlier in this paper that the Ministry

does not send the examination syllabus until a month before the examination takes place. The

suggestion is to involve teachers themselves in the process of determining which content to

include, and which to exclude, from the syllabus. A way to do this is by conducting a simple,

straight forward survey among teachers who prepare students for the PE, asking them to

select which units they managed to cover up until the time the Ministry is ready to prepare the

examination syllabus. From the findings of the survey, the Ministry will be able to prepare a

syllabus that is neither too wide nor to narrowed, according to how many teachers managed to

cover a specific unit. This may probably sound like a complicated situation to some readers,

and it is a recommendation that will have to be treated without cautiousness and examined

thoroughly, so as to find a way which serves both teachers and the authorities, without giving

more power to either side.

Another interesting suggestion by a participant in this study is that all students should have

equal opportunities in passing the Pancyprian Examinations, irrespective their performance

during the school year. According to the same participant, “If all students are aware that they

need to get a score of 10 out of 20, or 15 out of 20, they will be more motivated and study

even harder to pass the examination, making our work easier and more efficient.” Although

this seems as a feasible solution, this upholds other problems and issues that need to be taken

into consideration. If such measure is eventually applied, stakeholders need to be conscious

of students who may be motivated to study but have other learning difficulties that hold them

from doing well in the examinations. Foremost, this suggestion may reduce teacher stress as


42

students will hypothetically study more, but it will probably add higher levels of stress on

students. Travis and Cooper said, “It is important that individuals find their optimal stress

levels” (1996: 13) and therefore a golden mean must be found.

When it comes to the relationship between school administrators, teachers and parents,

especially after the results of a high-stakes examination, when parents are ready to blame the

teachers and the school in general for those results, there is a lot to be done according to the

findings from this study. Parents’ associations in Cyprus are strong and can be very active in

solving several school problems, especially when material needs occur. In this respect,

parents’ associations can be very helpful in providing the school with all these new technical

means, the use of which by both teachers and students will increase the interest and will give

more time in the classroom to answer questions and to solve problems. Apart from these, the

school itself can help in improving the relations between parents and teachers, by organising a

series of special lectures to parents regarding their own responsibilities, their own capabilities

of helping their children, of solving problems in cooperation with the school authorities.

These lectures and the association between parents, teachers, and other school authorities will

improve these relations and will make parents feel that they are part of the whole system.

What was interesting from these findings is the attitude of several teachers towards the notion

of stress. Some described stress as “creative” and that “it exists to make you feel better with

yourself and that you do your job to the maximum.” Notably, instead of suggesting ways by

which stress can be reduced, a teacher wrote the following:

I am not sure there is anything that can really make anything different. For me, the

statements above are like the natural laws of the teaching occupation! It would be

great if things could change, but if we wish to view things from a realistic point of

view that’s just not possible! Can you picture a principal of a school saying it’s OK

that 50% of your students failed the test knowing that you did your best!?


43

Chapter 5

Conclusions, Limitations and Future Research

5.1. Summary and Conclusions of the Study

The purpose of this dissertation was to explore and illustrate EFL teachers’ perceptions on

stress as a consequence of the Pancyprian Examinations. The results from the present

investigation revealed new, surprising and unique findings. The first of these was the amount

and level of stress teachers perceive as a consequence of the Pancyprian Examinations.

Participants in the study reported a great amount of disruptions in their classrooms,

disruptions that are more highlighted when preparing students for the PE and the day of the

examination gets closer. Expressly, teachers maintained a unanimous stance towards the

pressure they receive from both school administrators and parents to make sure students do

well on the exam. They also reported higher levels of stress when realizing that there is not

enough time to cover the entire examination syllabus set by the Ministry, and that the existing

exam material is not sufficient, forcing them to spend hours after school preparing additional

teaching materials that will aid students in preparing for the test. What is more, participants

concluded that the way students react to test preparation affects their teaching practices and

underline that it is not entirely their fault if students do not do well on the test and that, school

administrators, parents and the students themselves must recognize the extent of the

responsibility they have in order to pass the exams. The final issue that was presented in the

findings was the participants’ belief that the main and most salient stressor in regards to the

PE and the examination policies is the educational system of Cyprus in general, which is

characterized by some participants, along with the people who run it, as “useless and

irrelevant with everything that is happening in other countries for decades.”

In overall, this study has proven once more that test washback is a salient and complex

phenomenon that needs constant research so as stakeholders are updated with any new issues

that arise from it. Especially when examining test washback and how it relates to other

vulnerable issues such is teacher stress, in any teaching and learning context, it is important

that researchers understand the impacts, effects and relationship of the two and take

immediate measures to reduce any negative washback and teacher stress, or any other issue

under study, through constant investigations.


44

5.2. Limitations of the Study

Although the current study was carefully prepared and has reached its aims, there are still

several limitations and shortcomings that could not be avoided and need to be addressed. The

investigation undertaken to answer the research questions presented in this paper consisted of

a literature review of the existing empirical research on washback, high-stakes examinations,

and teacher stress, as well as a private investigation focusing on practicing EFL teachers in

America, China, Cyprus and Japan. Although the original plan was to collect opinions from

EFL teachers in the countries mentioned above, in order to determine to what extent their

opinions differ from each other, and although the overall total of the sample size was

significantly enough to proceed with data analysis, the extremely low response rate from

America, China and Japan was problematic. In view of the fact that conclusions cannot be

drawn from such small n-sizes, this paper tried to address the research questions using

responses from Cypriot teachers only who provided the majority of the responses.

It was mentioned in chapter 3 that some accommodations had to be introduced, so as to help

teachers complete the questionnaire. The facts that the questionnaire had to be translated into

Greek, and the unfamiliarity of some participants of the use of Internet, which led to the

completion of some questionnaires via telephone, are a limitation to this study as well, since

we cannot determine if these teachers may have responded differently to other teachers

because of their lack of language or internet skills. Thus, there is no way of knowing if any

differences between their responses and those who just completed the questionnaire were

caused by their lack of language or internet skills, or the accommodation.

In addition, since the paper focused on Cypriot teachers and was conducted by the author

herself, it is unavoidable that in this study a certain degree of bias can be found. However, all

statements were always supported by existing evidence, which came from both the empirical

literature and the responses from the participants of the questionnaires.

5.3. Suggestions for Further Research

This study was primarily focused on the teachers’ perceptions about stress due to high-stakes

examinations. However, the results of the study have shown that further research is needed,

and produced more questions that need to be answered. For example, the relationships

between teachers and parents need to be explored in depth, and especially the feelings,

opinions and views of the students’ parents on examination preparation and the role of

examinations in their children’s lives.


45

Moreover, the introduction of accommodations to teachers in Cyprus for the purposes of this

study, including the translation of the questionnaire and its completion via phone due to lack

of internet skills, create a new path for further investigation, which will examine the

importance of technological means in Cyprus and how willing teachers from older

generations are to modernize their current teaching methods. Researchers could generate a

study that would last over the course of a school year, and which would include observations

of a number of classrooms. In order to draw valid conclusions, it is recommended that a

comparison should be made, by implementing the use of technology in some classrooms, and

using traditional, current methods of teaching in others. This research could have as a context

the Pancyprian Examinations, or any other context that involves high-stakes testing.

Word Count: 16.280


46

References

Alderson, C., & Hamp Lyons, L. (1996). TOEFL preparation courses: a study of washback.

Language testing , 13 (3), 280-297.

Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics , 14 (2), 115-

129.

Amrein, A. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). High-Stakes Testing, Uncertainty, and Student

Learning. Education Policy Analysis Archieves , 10 (18), 1-74.

Andrews, S. (2004). Washback and Curriculum Innovation. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe, & A.

Curtis, Washback in Language Testing: Research Context and Methods (pp. 37-52).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elbraum Associates, Inc.

Andrews, S., Fullilove, J., & Wong, Y. (2002). Targeting washback - a case study. System ,

30, 207-223.

Babbie, E. R. (2012). The Practice of Social Research. New York: Wadsworth.

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Bailey, K. M. (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept in language

testing. Language Testing , 13 (3), 257-279.

Bailey, K. M. (1999). Washback in language testing. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing

Service.

Bakker, A. B. et al. (2007). Job resources boost work engagement, particularly when job

demands are high. Journal of Educational Psychology , 99, 274-284.

Ballet, K., Kelchtermans, G., & Loughran, J. (2006). Beyond intesification towards a

scholarship of practice Analysing changes in teachers' work lives. Teachers and

Teaching , 12 (2), 209-229.

Bandura, A. (1982). Self-Efficacy Mechanism in Human Agency. American Psychologists

Association , 37 (2), 122-147.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Barrett, B. (2009). No child left behind and the assault on teachers' professional practices and

identities. Teaching and Teacher Education , 25, 1018-1025.

Berryhill, J., Linney, J. A., & Fromewick, J. (2009). The effects oh education accountability

on teachers: Are policies too stress-provoking for their own good? International

Journal of Education Policy and Leadership , 4 (5), 1-15.

Braden, J. P., & Schroeder, J. L. (2004). High-Stakes Testing and No Child Left Behind:

Information and Strategies for Educators. Helping Children at Home and School II:

Handouts for Families and Educators .

Brown, J. D. (2001). Using Surveys in Language Programs. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Brown, J., Davis, S., & Johnson, E. (2002). Teachers on teaching - A survey of the teaching

profession. London: Market and Opinion Research International.

Buck, G. (1988). Testing listening comprehension in Japanese university entrance

examinations. JALT Journal , 10, 12-42.

Cheng, L. (1997). How does washback influence teaching? Implications for Hong Kong.

Language and Education , 11 (1).

Cheng, L. Y. (1998). Impact of a public English examination change on students' perceptions

and attitudes toward their English learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation , 24

(3), 279-301.

Cheng, L., Watanabe, Y., & Curtis, A. (2004). Washback in Language Testing: Research

Contexts and Methods. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Clark, J. L. (1983). Language testing: past and current status - directions for the future.

Modern Language Journal , 67, 431-432.

Clark, M., et al. (2001). The marketplace of educational testing. The National Board of

Educational Testing and Public Policy , 2 (3), 1-12.


47

Clarke, M. et al. (2003). Perceived effects of state-mandated testing programs on teaching and

learning: Findings from interviews with educators in low-, medium-, and high-stakes

states. Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and

Educational Policy, Boston College.

Cyprus Ministry of Education and Culture. (2013). The Education System of Cyprus.

Retrieved August 16, 2013, from http://www.highereducation.ac.cy/en/educational-

system.html

Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality, and educational accountability: The irony of

'No Child Left Behind. Race Ethnicity and Education , 10 (3), 145-260.

Diamond, J. B., & Spillane, J. P. (2004). High-Stakes Accountability in Urban Elementary

Schools: Challenging or Reproducing Inequality? Teachers College Record , 106 (6),

1145-1176.

Donnelly, L. A., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). High school science teachers' views of standards and

accountability. Sciene Education Policy , 1050-1075.

Ebert-Flattau, P. et al. (2006). The National Defense Education Act of 1958: Selected

Outcomes. Washington, DC: Schience and Technology Policy Institute.

Epstein, S., & Meier, P. (1989). Constructive thinking: A broad coping variable with specific

components. Journal of Personality and Individual Differences , 57, 332-350.

Fimian, M. J. (1982). What is teacher stress? The Clearing House , 56 (3), 101-105.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Coping as a mediator of emotion. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology , 54 (3), 466-475.

Fredericks, A. D. (2010). The Teacher's Handbook: Strategies for Success. Plymouth:

Rowman and Littlefield Education.

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a Conceptual Framework for

Mixed-method Evaluation Designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 11

(3), 255-274.

Harlen, W., & Deakin-Crick, R. (2002). A systematic review of the impact of summative

assessment and tests on students' motivation for learning. London: Institute of

Education, University of London.

Hazou, E. (2008). Protests as House raises retirement age of teachers. Retrieved September 5,

2013, from Cyprus Mail:

http://www.cyprusedirectory.com/articleview.aspx?ID=20043

Heaton, J. B. (1990). Classroom testing. Harlow: Longman.

Heubert, P., & Hauser, R. M. (1999). High stakes: Testing for tracking promotions and

graduation. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

HMI. (1986). Report of Her Majesty's Inspectorate on the Effects of the Education Service in

England and Wales of Local Authority Expenditure Policies. London: DES.

Hughes, A. (1993). Backwash and TOEFL 2000. Unpublished manuscript, University of

Reading: University of Reading Press.

Jones, T., & Kim, Y. (2010). High-stakes testing. In C. Kridel, Encyclopedia of curriculum

studies (pp. 441-443). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Keyes, C. R. (no date). Parent-Teacher Partnerships: A Theoretical Approach for Teachers.

ECAP Collaborative , 107-118.

Kyriacou, C. (2001). Teacher stress: Directions for future research. Educational Review , 53

(1), 27-35.

Kyriacou, C., & Sutcliffe, J. (1979). Teacher stress and satisfaction. Educational Research ,

21 (2), 89-96.

Lam, H. P. (1994). Methodology washback - an insider's view. In D. B. Nunan, Bringing

about change in language education: Proceedings of the Internaional Language in

Education Conference (pp. 83-102). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.

Lamprianou, I. (2012). Effects of forced policy-making in high stakes examinations: the case

of the Republic of Cyprus. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice ,

19 (1), 27-44.

Lattimore, R. (2003). The Wrath of High-Stakes Tests. The Urban Review , 33 (1), 57-67.


48

Lazarus, R. S. (1990). Theory-based stress measurement. Psychological Inquiry , 1 (1), 3-13.

Lazarus, R. S. (1993). From psychological stress to the emotions: A history of changing

outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology , 44, 1-21.

Madaus, G. F. (1988). The influence of testing on the curriculum. In L. Tanner, Critical issues

in curriculum: eighty-seventh yearbook of the National Society for the Study of

Education (Part 1). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Margolis, J., & Nagel, L. (2006). Education Reform and the Role of Administrators in

Mediating Teacher Stress. Teacher Education Quarerly , 143-159.

McCormack, B., & Hill, E. (1997). Conducting a Survey: The SPSS Workbook. London:

International Thomson Business Press.

Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language testing , 13 (3),

241-256.

Minister of Education and Culture. (2005, September 12). Μέτρα άμεσης εφαρμογής και

εσωτερικές εκπαιδευτικές ρυθμίσεις για αναβάθμιση της προσφερόμενης

εκπαίδευσης στη Δημόσια Μέση και Τεχνική Εκπαίδευση, με στόχο την

καταπολέμηση της παραπαιδείας. Retrieved August 15, 2013, from

http://www.cyprus.gov.cy/moi/pio/pio.nsf/6645bc8e70e73e2cc2257076004d01c1/8c

b73687784441f9c225707a003d2077?OpenDocument

Monette, D. R. et al. (2011). Applied Social Research: A Tool for the Human Services.

Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.

Moses, M. S., & Nanna, M. J. (2007). The testing culture and the persistence of high-stakes

testing reforms. Education and Culture , 23 (1), 55-72.

Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2007). Collateral Damage: How High Stakes Testing

Corrupts America's Schools. Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.

O'Connor, E. E., Dearing, E., & Collins, B. A. (2011). Teacher-child relationship and

behavior problem trajectories in elementary schools. American Educational Research

Journal , 48 (1), 120-162.

O'Day, J. A. (2002). Complexity, Accountability, and School Improvement. Harvard

Educational Review , 72 (3), 1-37.

OELMEK (1998). Announcements of the Teachers’ Union.

Pearson, I. (1988). Tests as Levers for Change. In D. Chamberlain, & R. J. Baumgardner, ESP

in the Classroom: Pracice and Evaluation. ELT Documents Volume 128 (pp. 98-

107). London: Modern Englsih Publications.

Perea-Jimenez, J. (2008). Learner-centered Classrooms Under the Standardization Era.

California: University of California.

Phelps, R. P. (2011). Teach to the Test? Most of the problems with testing have one surprising

source: cheating by school administrators and teachers. The Wilson Quarterly , 38-

42.

Popham, W. J. (2001). Teaching to the test? Helping All Students Archieve , 58 (6), 16-20.

Qi, L. (2005). Stakeholders' conflicting aims undermine the washback function of a high-

stakes test. Language Testing , 22 (2), 142-173.

Ravitch, D. (2007). EdSpeak: A Glossary of Education Terms, Phrases, Buzzwords, and

Jargon. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Read, J., & Hayes, B. (2003). The impact of IELTS on preparation for academic study in New

Zealand. IELTS Internatinal English Language Testing System Research Reports , 4,

153-206.

Reitan, E. A. (2003). The Thatcher Revolution: Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair,

and the Transformation of Modern Britain, 1979-2001. Oxford: Rowman and

Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Richards, J. (2012). Teacher stress and Coping Strategies: A National Snapshot. The

Educational Forum , 76 (3), 299-316.

Ryan, R. M. et al. (2005). Legislating competence: High-stakes testing policies and their

relations with psychological theories and research. In A. a. Elliot, Handbook of

Competence and Motivation (pp. 354-372). New York: Guildford Publications.


49

Sabanci, A. (2011). The Effect of Teachers' Stress on Educational Organizations’ Health.

International Journal of Business and Social Science , 2 (11), 91-100.

Samad, A. et al. (2010). Assessment of Stress and Its Risk Factors among Primary School

Teachers in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. Global Journal of Health Sciences , 2 (2),

163-171.

Seal, A. K., Sass, D. A., & Martin, N. K. (2010). Comparison of Three Competing Models on

Teacher Stresors and Job Dissatisfaction and Intent to Quit. Denver, CO: Educational

Research Association.

Shih, C. (2007). A new washback model of students' learning. The Canadian Modern

Language Review , 64 (1), 135-162.

Shohamy, E. (1992). Beyond Proficiency Testing: A Diagnostic Feedback Testing Model for

Assessing Foreign Language Learning. Modern Language Journal , 76, 513-521.

Shohamy, E. (1993). The Power of Tests. Washington DC: National Foreign Language

Center.

Shohamy, E., Donitsa-Schmidt, S., & Ferman, I. (1996). Test impact revisited: washback

effect over time. Language Testing , 13 (3), 298-317.

Spratt, M. (2005). Washback and the classroom: the implications for teaching and learning of

studies of washback from exams. Language Teaching Research , 9 (1), 5-29.

Stacey, S. E., & Moyer, K. L. (1982). A guide to survey development: Manual on writing a

survey. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania State, Department of Education.

Stecher, B. M. (2002). Consequences of large-scale, high-stakes testing on school and

classroom practices. In L. S. Hamilton, B. M. Stecher, & S. P. Klein, Making sense

of test-based accountability in education (pp. 79-100). Santa Monica: RAND

Corporation.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddie, C. (2003). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral

Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Travers, C. J., & Cooper, C. L. (1996). Teachers under pressure: stress in the teaching

profession. London: Routledge.

Tsagari, D. (2011). Washback of a high-stakes English exam on teachers' perceptions and

practices. In K. e. al., Selected papers from the 19th International Symposium on

Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (ISTAL 19) (pp. 431-445). Thessaloniki:

Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Aristotle University of

Thessaloniki.

Wall, D. (2000). The impact of high stakes testing on teaching and learning: Can this be

predicted or controlled? System , 28 (4), 499-509.

Watanabe, Y. (1996). Does grammar translation come from the entrance examination?

Preliminary findings from classroom-based research. Language testing , 13 (3), 318-

333.

Watanabe, Y. (2000). Washback effects of the English section of the Japanese universityy

entrance examinations on instruction in pre-college level EFL. Language Testing

Update , 27, 42-47.

Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). When helping helps: Autonomous motivation for

prosocial behavior and its influence on well-being for the helper and recipient.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 98 (2), 222-244.

Willis, J. S., & Haymore-Sandholtz, J. (2009). Constrained professionalism: Dilemmas of

teaching in the face of test-based accountability. Teachers College Record , 111 (4),

1065-1114.

Yoon, J. S. (2002). Teacher characteristics as predictors of teacher-student relationships:

Stress, negative affect and self-efficacy. Social Behavior and Personality: An

International Journal , 30 (5), 485-493.

Zachariou-Othonos, A. (2000). Stakeholders' beliefs and conceptions about inspection and

improvement in the Cypriot Educational System. University of Nottingham .


50

Zastrow, C., & Janc, H. (2004). The condition of the liberal arts in America's public schools:

A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Council for

Basic Education.

Κυριακίδου, Χ. (2010). Πως διορίζονται οι Ευρωπαίοι εκπαιδευτικοί (How European teachers

are appointed). Retrieved August 17, 2013, from Ανεξάρτητη Κίνηση Δασκάλων και

Νηπιαγωγών:

http://akida.info/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1247%3A2012-

03-04-12-07-14&catid=212%3Alatest-news&Itemid=63&lang=el


51

Appendix A

Examples from Andrews, Fullilove and Wonga’s Findings


52

Appendix B

Consent Letter

Dear Sir or Madame,

My name is Georgia Vraketta and I am a postgraduate student at the University of Leicester,

studying Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL). I am currently in the

process of conducting my thesis, which considers the effects of high-stakes testing on teacher

stress, motivation and student achievement.

I would appreciate your participation by completing the questionnaire presented on this page.

The survey includes questions about your personal details, your experiences as a teacher, and

your views on high-stakes tests.

Participation in this study is entirely voluntary, and you have the right to withdraw at any time

without penalty. You also have the right to avoid answering questions that may make you feel

uncomfortable. The questionnaire should not take more than ten (10) minutes to complete.

Please try to answer the questionnaire openly and honestly. Your participation in this study

will not affect your job status in any way. All data will be collected anonymously and used by

me and for academic purposes only.

If you would like to participate, please click on the link below:

https://www.survey.bris.ac.uk/leicester/high-stakes_tests_and_teacher_stress

Additionally, I would be grateful if you could forward this message to your colleagues and

anyone who may be able to complete this questionnaire.

Yours faithfully,

Georgia Vraketta

https://www.survey.bris.ac.uk/leicester/high-stakes_tests_and_teacher_stress


53

Appendix C

Questionnaire

Welcome

My name is Georgia Vraketta and I am a postgraduate student at the University of Leicester,

studying Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL). I am currently in the

process of conducting my thesis, which considers the effects of high-stakes testing on teacher

stress, motivation and student achievement.

I would appreciate your participation by completing the questionnaire presented on this page.

The survey includes questions about your personal details, your experiences as a teacher, and

your views on high-stakes tests.

Participation in this study is entirely voluntary, and you have the right to withdraw at any time

without penalty. You also have the right to avoid answering questions that may make you feel

uncomfortable. The questionnaire should not take more than ten (10) minutes to complete.

Please try to answer the questionnaire openly and honestly. Your participation in this study

will not affect your job status in any way. All data will be collected anonymously and used by

me and for academic purposes only.

If you wish to continue with this survey, please click on the button below.


54

Section I

About you

1. What is your gender?

Male

Female

2. What is your nationality?

3. Write any teaching qualifications you may have in the space below. Write as much as you

like; the box expands automatically.

4. How many years of teaching experience do you have?

1-5

6-10

11-15

16-20

21-25

26-30

Other (please specify):

5. With what kind of English are you more familiar with?

English as a First Language

English as a Foreign Language*

English as a Second Language**


*English as a Foreign Language is taught in countries where the native language is not

English.

**English as a Second Language is used where English is being taught to students who are

from a non-English speaking country, but studying English in an English speaking country.


55

6. Select the country you currently teach in, or the last country you taught in.

7. In what kind of teaching environment do you work in?

Private school

Public school

University

College

Private tutoring


8. What age groups do you teach?

(select all that apply)

5-6

6-7

7-8

8-9

9-10

11-12

13-14

14-15

15-16

16-17

17-18

18-19

19-20

20-21

21-22

22-23

23-24

24-25



56

9. On average, how many students are in your class?

Under 15

15-25

26-35

More than 35


57

Section II

High-stakes Test Preparation*

*We define high-stakes testing as the assessment of individual performance, normally

through paper-and-pencil measures, and the use of those data to make decisions about

promotion, graduation, instructor effectiveness, program performance, and the

approval of educational programs and institutions.

10. Do you participate, or have you ever participated, in the construction of a high-stakes

test?

Yes

No

Which one?

i. Briefly describe what your role is, or was.

11. Do you prepare, or have you ever prepared, students to take a particular high-stakes test?

Yes

No

Which one?

12. How long before the test do you start preparation?

3 weeks

1 month

2 months

3 months

4 months

5 months

6 months



58

13. Does your teaching change when you engage in high-stakes testing preparation?

Yes

No

How?

14. How do your students usually react to high-stakes tests and their preparation?

Does their reaction affect your teaching, either positively or negatively?

Yes

No

i. In what ways?

15. How would you describe your school's performance on high-stakes tests?

Below average

Average

Above average

Why do you think that is?

i. What do you think should be done to improve these scores?


59

Section III

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

16. You feel more pressured because you must make sure students pass the test.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

17. Your school treats tested content areas as more important than non-tested content

areas.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

18. The school administration highlights the importance of maintaining or improving the

school's reputation.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

19. You spend hours preparing teaching materials for test preparation.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree


60

20. The students' parents understand that you put a lot of effort in test preparation.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

21. Your students do not study at home because they understand everything you teach

them during test preparation.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

22. You constantly remind students that there are negative consequences if they do not

pass a high-stakes test.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

23. You are the one to blame if students do not pass the test.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree


61

24. Your students are not afraid to ask you questions regarding the contents of a high-

stakes test.

Strongly agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly disagree

25. Please select all the numbers that represent the statements that cause you stress as a

teacher.

(select all that apply)

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Why do these statements cause you stress? Please include the numbers of the

statements you are referring to.

i. What do you think should be done in order to reduce your stress levels?


62

Section IV

Additional Comments

26. Is there anything else you would like to add, that may be proved helpful for this

study?


63

Thank you

I would like to genuinely thank you for completing this questionnaire. Your

answers will be treated carefully, methodically and, most importantly,

anonymously.

Have a great rest of the day/evening!

A Washback Study of the Pancyprian Examinations on Teacher Stress

Documents

Transcript of A Washback Study of the Pancyprian Examinations on Teacher Stress