“Will we have it in our summative?” … is quite a familiar phrase for English Language and Literature, and not only, teachers of Diploma Program (DP) in International Baccalaureate, isn’t it? While we are proud of our students’ performance and diligence, we are painfully aware that their academic achievements might have been gained at the cost of both teaching (curriculum, teaching methods, delivery) and learning (curriculum, content, life skills). This influence is also evident from the literature, where Gates (1995) defines it as “a washback effect”, i.e., “the influence of testing on teaching and learning” (p.102). Prodromou (1995), while strictly differentiating between ‘testing’ and ‘teaching’, suggests a negative effect of backwash on teaching, which he believes, greatly complicates it. 

Although external exams of English A and B courses (Paper 1, Paper 2 and Individual Oral) are barely considered to be tests, as they are full-fledged final written and spoken exams, we believe that the term “backwash effect” also carries some influence on language and literature learning and teaching. Teachers have to cover a huge amount of material within two years of DP, while students, along with other subjects, have to process this huge amount of material. So many exams and IB components, so little time. And no wonder, teachers are more and more leaning to the program to be optimised, which to our concerns, can lead to keeping only essentials. 

Now, the question arises what the “essential” is and what is not. Hughes (1989) proposes the following to ensure positive backwash effect: test should develop certain skills; test content should be varied and cover wide-spectrum areas; it should have an effect of unpredictability; make both teachers and students understand the procedure of the test, and others. In the same vein, Bailey (2016) puts forward the following aspects: meeting language learning objectives and requirements, authenticity of the tests and samples, ensuring learner autonomy and self-assessment, providing feedback of the test results.

In our search for a balance between students’ academic achievements and their future non-academic life, there is a sinking feeling in our teaching practice that we might be overlooking the opportunities to develop their career/real life aptitudes and skills. Although there is a sufficient literature in negative effects of backwash of testing, such as IELTS, high stake tests, standardized testing (Paker, 2013; Watkins, Dahlin & Ekholm, 2005) and ways to turn it into positive one, we seek to explore the backwash effect of written and spoken exams on language teaching and learning. We believe that the assignments covered in Diploma Program are quite challenging and intensive. They require time-managements and analytical skills as leaners are asked to write a textual analysis on a given text type and a comparative essay based on at least two literary works they have studied in class (Language A). With regards to Language B, they have to produce the text type, which requires more than mere selection of the right answer from multiple choices. Despite such a difference in requirements of the final exams, we are still concerned about the fact that there are more exams in classroom than skills development, which is, we believe, a prevailing phenomenon in education.

With that in mind, the following research questions have been addressed:

1) What are both benefits and drawbacks of predominance of the exam preparation in English class?

2) How can the classroom be modified to prepare students for life (not just exams)? 

The given study is a collaborative research of an English Language A and Language B teachers as part of Action research conducted in 2022-2023 academic year in Nazarbayev Intellectual School (IB World School). The sample consists of two groups. The first group is an entire class of twelveth-grade students (10), was a part of the research. These students were selected for several reasons. The major reason is that they are exposed to the curriculum at the moment, their exams are not yet passed and they have the freshest memory of the classroom. They can sincerely share their thoughts and feelings about their preparation and readiness for the upcoming exams. The second group (12) are a mix of graduates of 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 cohorts. They are currently pursuing their careers in universities and are a good source of investigating their opinions towards the skills they gained at school, whether they are beneficial or not in their academic paths. To address research questions, a mixed research design was employed. Combining both quantitative and qualitative data provides “a very powerful mix” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 42). First, Subject reports of two cohorts (2020-2021, 2021-2022) have been analysed to compare students’ performance in the beginning of the 11th grade (MOCK exams) and their final exams. Apart from this, open-ended interviews that provided students’ reflection offered different perspectives on the research topic, providing “a complex structure of the situation” (Creswell, p. 537).

Having analysed the data, it has become evident that so called backwash effect on Language learning and teaching has had mostly positive effect on students’ learning. This can be seen from the final results of our school compared to the world results, where in 2022 our students received on average IB 5,47 out of 7, compared to world result IB 5,43 (Language A). Regrading Language B, our students’ result IB 6,16 was equal to the world result IB 6,16. It should be noted that, compared to the world, English for our students is a third language (after Kazakh and Russian) and taught in a non-English speaking country. Open-ended interviews have shown students’ positive attitudes towards exam preparations as they “don’t feel threatened” being accustomed to working under strict deadlines and being bound to time restrictions. This, inevitably, developed their self-organisation skills (staying focused, being mindful, stress-resistant). Another positive aspect they mentioned was the ability to work with broad range of text types that students are exposed to in their academic lives at universities. Also, the skills they learnt in English class (coding, decoding, analysing, evaluating authors’ choices) have been indirectly assisting them in their more extensive mid-term and final papers at universities. However, data derived from open-ended interviews, revealed that this backwash effect on Language learning and teaching has had negative effect on teachers’ teaching the course. Students’ responses resonated with our concerns about a change in teaching methods. Students noted that, even though, such approach is effective, it is monotonous and quite repetitive. This is a call for English DP teachers to think and vary the methods used in classroom, as even though students’ academic performance is high and they enter top-tier universities worldwide, teachers need to fulfill all facet of their profession.

Bailey, K. M. (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept in language testing. Language testing, 13(3), 257-279. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. Gates, S. (1995). Exploiting washback from standardized tests. Language testing in Japan. Hughes, A. (1989) Testing for Language Teachers. Second Edition. Cambridge University press. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage. Paker, T. (2013). The backwash effect of the test items in the achievement exams in preparatory classes. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1463-1471. Prodromou, L. (1995). The backwash effect: from testing to teaching. 13-25. Watkins, D., Dahlin, B., & Ekholm, M. (2005). Awareness of the backwash effect of assessment: A phenomenographic study of the views of Hong Kong and Swedish lecturers. Instructional Science, 33, 283-309.