Test Perceptions and Preparation Strategies in the Chinese EFL Context: A Washback Study

This study investigates the relationships between Chinese EFL learners’ perceptions of the National Matriculation English Test (NMET) and their preparation strategies. Drawing on survey data from 620 senior high school students, analyses examined how perceptions of test importance and test difficulty influence five categories of strategies: cognitive, metacognitive, memory, compensation, and social-affective. Results show that perceived importance is positively correlated with all strategies, particularly metacognitive regulation, suggesting that high stakes motivate structured and reflective preparation. In contrast, perceived difficulty correlated negatively with most strategies, especially cognitive and compensation, indicating that overwhelming challenge suppresses adaptive engagement.

Washback, Test perceptions, Preparation strategies

1. Aldson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied linguistics, 14(2), 115-129. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bailey, K. M. (1996). Working for washback: A review of the washback concept in language testing. Language testing, 13(3), 257-279. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Cheng, L. (2005). Changing language teaching through language testing : a washback study. Cambridge University Press. Publisher description http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0664/2006277397-d.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Cheng, L. (2008). The key to success: English language testing in China. Language testing, 25(1), 15-37. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Dong, M. (2020). Structural relationship between learners’ perceptions of a test, learning practices, and learning outcomes: A study on the washback mechanism of a high-stakes test. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 64, 100824. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual review of psychology, 53(1), 109-132. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Green, A. (2007a). IELTS washback in context: Preparation for academic writing in higher education (Vol. 25). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Green, A. (2007b). Washback to learning outcomes: A comparative study of IELTS preparation and university pre‐sessional language courses. Assessment in Education, 14(1), 75-97. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Hawkey, R. (2006). Impact theory and practice (Vol. 24). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hughes, A. (1993). Backwash and TOEFL 2000. Unpublished manuscript, University of Reading. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Liu, X., & Yu, J. (2021). Relationships between learning motivations and practices as influenced by a high-stakes language test: The mechanism of washback on learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 100967. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language testing, 13(3), 241-256. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning styles and strategies. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT) 1990: Linguistics, Language Teaching and Language Acquisition: The Interdependece of Theory, Practice and Research, 438. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational psychology review, 18(4), 315-341. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Perry Hinton, D., Hinton, P. R., McMurray, I., & Brownlow, C. (2004). SPSS explained. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Qi, L. (2004). The intended washback effect of the National Matriculation English Test in China: Intentions and reality. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Qi, L. (2005). Stakeholders’ conflicting aims undermine the washback function of a high-stakes test. Language testing, 22(2), 142-173. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Qi, L. (2007). Is testing an efficient agent for pedagogical change? Examining the intended washback of the writing task in a high‐stakes English test in China. Assessment in Education, 14(1), 51-74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Razavipour, K., Mansoori, M., & Shooshtari, Z. G. (2020). Test takers’ perspectives on an English language test in Iranian higher education: A washback study. Issues in Educational Research, 30(3), 1058-1083. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. 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. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Xie, Q., & Andrews, S. (2013). Do test design and uses influence test preparation? Testing a model of washback with Structural Equation Modeling. Language testing, 30(1), 49-70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar