Extending the Scope of the English Exit Exam: A Study from a Ukrainian Classical University

  • Olesia LiubashenkoEmail author
  • Olga Yashenkova
Part of the Second Language Learning and Teaching book series (SLLT)


The study explores the scenario of the English exit exam that Ukrainian students are required to take at the end of their BA program, addressing some challenges related to student exam performance. Such exams are formal and limited to quantitative assessment, they are traditionally oral and administered by the State Examination Board. The exam scenario commonly includes only the acts of sending and receiving information that are programed in advance and expected by its participants. These acts block the aspiration of examinees to expand their scope of thinking and narrow it to memorizing and answering according to a certain pattern. The study, which is based on a sample of 151 students who major in Ukrainian language and literature and minor in English as a foreign language, aims to change the existing exam scenario. We see the exam as a macro communicative act, and its scenario should imply a highly interactive activity of unique language personalities. The scenario we suggest includes a talk in interaction that shows symmetry and role reversal, and gives the participants an opportunity for spiritual and intellectual development. The function of examiners is to facilitate spoken interactions by getting examinees to think laterally. Results indicate that lateral thinking is a necessary condition for the successful implementation of the exam as a macro communicative act and serves as an instrument for ongoing learning. The study raises a number of topical issues related to the impact of assessment procedures on learners.


English exit exam Macro communicative act Exam scenario Lateral thinking Ongoing learning 


  1. Abedi, J. (2010). Performance assessments for English language learners. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). In M. Holquist (Ed.). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  3. Balakrishnan, A. (2007, April 24). Edward de Bono: ‘Iraq? They just need to think it through.’ The Guardian. Retrieved from
  4. Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20, 481–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beacco, J.-C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., Vollmer, H., & Sheils, J. (2016). A handbook for curriculum development and teacher training: The language dimension in all subjects. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
  6. Benner, A. D. (2013). Exit examinations, peer academic climate, and adolescents’ developmental outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 51(1), 67–80. Scholar
  7. Bøhn, H. (2015). Assessing spoken EFL without a common rating scale: Norwegian EFL teachers’ conceptions of constructs. Sage Open, 5(4), 1–12. Scholar
  8. Bovée, C. L., & Thill, J. V. (2000). Business communication today (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, H. D., & Abeywickrama, P. (2010). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson.Google Scholar
  10. Chomsky, N. (2015, January 16). Calls to action: Noam Chomsky on the dangers of standardized testing [Video file]. The Progressive Magazine. Retrieved from
  11. Cohen, A. (2011). Strategies in learning and using a second language (2nd ed.). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  12. Damankesh, M., & Babaii, E. (2015). The washback effect of Iranian high school final examinations on students’ test-taking and test-preparation strategies. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 45, 62–69. Scholar
  13. De Bono, E. (1992). Serious creativity: Using the power of lateral thinking to create new ideas. New York: Harper Business.Google Scholar
  14. East, M. (2015). Coming to terms with innovative high-stakes assessment practice: Teachers’ viewpoints on assessment reform. Language Testing, 32(1), 101–120. Scholar
  15. Griffiths, C. (2013). The strategy factor in successful language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  16. Hatipoĝlu, Ç. (2016). The impact of the university entrance exam on EFL education in Turkey: Pre-service English language teachers’ perspective. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 136–144. Scholar
  17. Huang, J., Han, T., & Schnapp, K. (2012). Do high-stakes test really address English language learners’ learning needs?—A discussion of issues, concerns, and implications. International Journal of Learning & Development, 2(1), 499–508. Scholar
  18. Jakubinskiy, L. P. (1986). Izbrannye raboty: jazyk i ego funktsionirovanie [Selected works: Language and its functioning]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
  19. Kazemipour, S. (2014). Comparing the outcomes of two types of corrective feedback on EFL classes’ final exam. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 876–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., III, & Swanson, R. A. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (6th ed.). Amsterdam: Elesvier.Google Scholar
  21. Krasnykh, V. V. (2001). Osnovy psykholingvistiki i teorii komunikatsii. [Fundamentals of psycholinguistics and communication theory]. Moscow: Gnozis.Google Scholar
  22. Labordaa, J. G., Bejaranob, L. G., de Juana, N. O., Litzlera, M. F., & Rosaa, M. M. (2014). A comparison of pre-service towards testing: The spanish baccalaureate general test and the american OPI. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2386–2391. Scholar
  23. Leontyev, A. N. (1975). Dejatelnost, soznanie i lichnost [Activity, consciousness, and personality]. Moscow: Politizdat.Google Scholar
  24. Leontyev, A. A. (2008). Jazyk, rech, recevaja dejatelnost [Language, speech, and speech activity] (5th ed.). Moscow: LKI.Google Scholar
  25. Liubashenko, O. (2007). Linhvodydaktychni stratehiji: proektuvannija protsesu navchannija ukrajinskoji movy u vyshchej shkoli [Linguodidactic strategies: Ukrainian language learning design in higher education]. Nizhin: Aspect-Polihraf.Google Scholar
  26. Liubashenko, O., & Yashenkova, O. (2014). Getting students to think laterally as an evaluation strategy at the classical university. In W. Malec & K. Drabikowska (Eds.), Book of abstracts of linguistics beyond and within 2014: Challenging ideas and innovative applications (pp. 69–70). Lublin: KUL.Google Scholar
  27. Liubashenko, O., & Yashenkova, O. (2015). Getting students to think laterally as an evaluation strategy at the classical University. Studies in Linguistics and Methodology, 10, 77–94.Google Scholar
  28. Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations (M. Lopez-Morillas & L. Solotaroff, Trans.). In M. Cole (Ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  30. Matiushkin, А. М. (2009). Psikhologija myshlenija. myshlenie kak razreshenie problemnykh sytuatsij [Psychology of thinking. Thinking to solve problems]. Moscow: KDU.Google Scholar
  31. O’Malley, J. M., & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic assessment for English language learners: Practical approaches for teachers. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  32. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
  33. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2007). 21st century skills assessment. Retrieved from
  34. Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn. Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
  35. Rubinshtein, S. L. (1946). Osnovy obschej psihkologii [Fundamentals of general psychology] (2nd ed.). Moscow: Uchpedgiz.Google Scholar
  36. Segers, M., Dochy, F., & Cascallar, E. (Eds.). (2003). Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  37. Simon, M., Ercikan, K., & Rousseau, M. (Eds.). (2013). Improving large-scale assessment in education: Theory, issues, and practice. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. The National Center for Fair & Open Testing. (2007). The dangerous consequences of high-stakes standardized testing. Retrieved from
  39. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole (Eds.), Readings on the development of children (pp. 34–40). New York: Scientific American Books.Google Scholar
  40. Yashenkova, O. (2010). Osnovy teoriji movnoji komunikatsiji. [Fundamentals of speech communication theory]. Kyiv: Academia.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Methodology of Teaching Ukrainian and Foreign Languages and Literatures, the Institute of PhilologyTaras Shevchenko National University of KyivKyivUkraine
  2. 2.Department of English Philology and Intercultural Communication, the Institute of PhilologyTaras Shevchenko National University of KyivKyivUkraine

Personalised recommendations