Yücel, Ali2016-01-082016-01-081999http://hdl.handle.net/11693/18086Cataloged from PDF version of article.Ankara : The Institute of Economics and Social Sciences of Bilkent Univ., 1999.Thesis (Master's) -- Bilkent University, 1999.Includes bibliographical refences (leaves 94-95).Various proficiency tests are administered throughout the world for the selection of people for a field of study or a job. In many cases, an English proficiency test is the major device for selection, as in Turkey, which administers the Foreign Language Proficiency Examination for State Employees (KPDS) to Turkish state employees, Ph.D. students, and would-be associate professors. The test is administered in various languages, the most preferred being English. State employees take the test to determine their proficiency level and, if high enough, to raise their pay status. Ph.D. students are required to score at least 60 out of 100 on the test to be able to continue their future academic studies. The required score for associate professorship is 70. There have been a lot of complaints, on the part of the Ph.D. students and would-be associate professors, about the validity and reliability of the test due to the fact that many cannot obtain the required score even after many trials. Because of this, numerous KPDS preparation courses that follow different programs have flourished in recent years. The purpose of this study was to describe and analyze the KPDS test and provide guidelines for an ideal KPDS preparation course through investigating the various approaches to the KPDS preparation courses in various institutions. Two methods of data collection were employed in this study: item analysis and interviews. For item analysis purposes, 45 university graduates from various departments were administered a sample KPDS test. Test items were randomly selected, parallel in number to the items for each section of the actual test, from a KPDS booklet provided by Student Selection and Placement Center (OSYM). In addition to this, six KPDS teachers were interviewed individually about the kinds of materials they utilize in their courses and how they treat problematic items. Test scores gathered from the subjects were analyzed through calculations of item facility, item discrimination, and distracter efficiency to determine the quality of individual items. The results showed that more than half of the items were easy for the testees and that approximately 30% of the items did not discriminate well. The results also indicated that about 20% of the items were not efficient in terms of distracters or the construction of the stem. Through interviews, it was discovered that some teachers trained their students solely on test-taking strategies and exposed them to practice tests while others used a wide variety of materials focusing on a general improvement of skills. Regarding the problematic items, some teachers pointed out that they devised their own strategies, out of their experience, to solve them. For instance, most of the teachers reported that they told their students to focus only on tense agreement in grammar-related items that seemed to have two or more possible options. In the light of the findings, guidelines on how KPDS courses should be taught are provided in the final section of the study.xi, 132 leaves ; 30 cm.Englishinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessThesisB048788