chinesetime proficiency test

[mr.stinky]

i followed a link posted here (but despite various searches cannot find the original post)

to the chinesetime proficiency test:

http://www.chinesetime.cn/PlacementTest/tabid/140/Default.aspx

registered and took the test with the following results:

listening 12/12

grammar 5/10

reading 2/3

characters 5/6

"Your score is 77, Advanced Level. The average score of all the test takers is 39,

You are exceptional. We suggest you spend 4 hours / week on the studying."

this is after three semesters of, um, let's just say, not too rigorous study. i'm just

curious what results 'serious' students are getting, if any have bothered.

[cdn_in_bj]

The original post is here:

http://www.chinese-forums.com/index.php?/topic/184-jimmys-picture-story-books16

I will post my results after I take the test.

[imron]

The original post was removed as spam because it was made by a new user who had only made posts linking to the chinesetime website.

Out of curiosity, I just did the test myself and scored full marks. It also suggested I spend 4 hours a week on studying. I would rate their "Advanced" as "Intermediate".

[mr.stinky]

i see. i just ignored the sign up for hours part of the website, only taking the little test.

don't know whether this could be considered a valid test, considering my 'advanced level'

status with less than stellar performance. maybe their experts think i can 'draw sparky.'

(so does this mean i really need to increase my study to 4 hours per week?)

[imron]

i just ignored the sign up for hours part of the website, only taking the little test

Me too. Thank goodness for mailinator.

[Socks]

I smell a rat! Mr Stinky and I got the exact same scores (with the exact same breakdown of missed questions in each category)... Very suspicious...

What a bogus test...

[gougou]

Why don't you put your answers up and see whether it wasn't just a coincidence? Two people getting the same score is maybe too small a sample to condemn a test for.

[Socks]

Here it is Gougou... I'm just saying that a test with 31 questions, it's pretty unlikely that two people get the exact same breakdown of scores... If anyone were to get a score of 80 or 52 or 75 it would bring back a little credibility to the school...

Other reasons I think the test is bogus:

1. Any test that tests anything other than basic grammar using pinyin is a waste of time.

2. Any test that promises to tell you if you are an absolute beginner or an advanced student in 31 questions is a waste of time and totally ineffective.

3. Any test that says that I am an advanced student is a waste of time (because I am nowhere near to advanced... If anything, I am an advanced beginner).

Now, what you've all been waiting for - the test results...

Listening(40%)

Total: 12/ Correct: 12

Grammar(30%)

Total: 10/ Correct: 5

Reading(15%)

Total: 3/ Correct: 2

Characters(15%)

Total: 6/ Correct: 5

Your score is 77, Advanced Level.

The average score of all the test takers is 39, You are exceptional. We suggest you spend 4 hours / week on the studying.

[gougou]

Socks, I completely agree with you that the test is useless in gauging your Chinese ability. But constructing a bad test is completely different from constructing a test that will give every user the same result, regardless of their input.

So what I meant before was to put your answers up here, so that we could compare those to anybody else's. Or maybe a native speaker could have a look over them and check whether you actually made as many mistakes as the test claims you did.

But then again, we might just dismiss the whole test altogether and save us all some time

[tony1343]

Definitely possible to get a different score. I thought the listening was easy and got most of those right, but I was completely lost on the rest of the exam. I guess it is because I have basically just done Pimsleur's and have now just begun learning characters. I guess I need to study grammar and more vocab for this test.

[imron]

Yes, the test seems to be designed as a way to get people to sign up for their website, rather than providing an accurate guage of your Chinese, hence another reason the initial post was deleted

[mr.stinky]

the listening was fairly easy, as were the characters. the one character i didn't know was

just too complicated, so i chose 'complicated' as the answer. the grammar was

difficult only in that there were so many unknown characters, up to 50% unknown in

some questions.

it's highly likely that two learners at the same level will get the same results due to

not knowing the more advanced or less common characters. results would differ if

there were more questions.

but why hasn't the average score of all test takers change? to make everyone feel

'exceptional?'

[cdn_in_bj]

But constructing a bad test is completely different from constructing a test that will give every user the same result, regardless of their input.

Didn't imron say that he took the test and got full marks?

Anyways, I will take the test laster this afternoon. I actually took the test last night, but the site pooped out when I submitted the final page.

[Jack119]

the discussion is very interesting, i also had a try. i choose the answers randomly to see if i'll also get that *exceptional* mark (sh). Here is what i get:

Listening(40%)

Total: 12 Correct: 4 Blank: 0 Wrong: 8 Score: 14

Grammar(30%)

Total: 10 Correct: 2 Blank: 0 Wrong: 8 Score: 6

Reading(15%)

Total: 3 Correct: 2 Blank: 0 Wrong: 1 Score: 10

Characters(15%)

Total: 6 Correct: 1 Blank: 1 Wrong: 4 Score: 2

Your score is 32, Elementary Level.

The average score of all the test takers is 39, You are a little bit behind. We suggest you spend 8 hours / week on the studying.

I guess the core is accurate, but the average score 39 is fake (somehow hard-coded)

[imron]

I guess the core is accurate, but the average score 39 is fake (somehow hard-coded)

Not necessarily. Say they've had 1000 people take the test, then the few extra people who've taken the test over the past few days due to the link posted here are not necessarily enough to cause a variation in this.