An
Analyses of Theories and Practice of Language Testing in a Historical Timeline
and the Implication for the Language Teacher
by
Mike
Adeyi
Department
of English
Federal
College of Education. Kano
Email:
mikeadeyi2 gmail.com
Abstract
Language
testing aims at determining the quality and quantity of the language skills
that a learner has attained at a particular point in time. They are important
tools, because they are used to measure the success of individuals in different
aspects of life. But despite their importance, it was only in the 1980s that
language theorists began to raise questions of high sensitivity. Tests were
considered as purely linguistic acts,
therefore, very little attention was paid
to the social dimension of language as the most important medium of
communication among humans. With the advent of integrative testing, and later
communicative language testing, linguists became more conscious of the social
impact that tests have. Test is a highly complex undertaking that must be based
on theory as well as practice. In other words, there should be guiding
principles that should guide the teachers in the construction and
administration of a language test. This paper undertakes an analyses of
theories and practice of language testing in a historical timeline and the
implication for the language teacher. It highlights the major principles or the
characteristics that should guide every test. The paper x-rays the challenges
as well as prospects of language testing and then offers-suggest ions.
Key words: Theories, practice, language testing, language teacher, implication,
historical
timeline,
Introduction
Linguists generally see the human language as complex and
mysterious; a concept that tend to defile a universally accepted definition. There
are therefore as many definitions as there are linguists depending on what a
particular linguist or scholar is interested in. the above statement is
corroborated by Halliday (1975) when he posits that language could be defined
in various way depending on whether one is interested in dialectics and those
that speak these dialects, words and their histories, the differences in
language in different culture, the formal properties of language systems,
language as an art medium, uses of language and the like. It is pertinent to highlight
and examine some of the definitions as they are given by some linguists.
Edward Sapir (1921) definition, which is close to a century ago
since it was given still holds sway and has been accepted by some linguists (
Azikiwe 1998, Foyewa (2015), Adewuyi and Oluokun (2001) as a good definitions
of language. Sapir defines language as
. .
. a purely human and
non-instinctive method of communicating
ideas, notions and desires by means of a system of voluntarily product symbols
which are in the first instance auditory.
In another development, Sapir 1961 again sees language as a means
by which representation of human experiences work efficiently together when he
says that:
.. .language
is primarily vocal actualization of the tendency To see reality symbolically...an
actualization in terms of vocal expression of the tendency to master reality
not by direct adhoc ad hoc handling of this element but by-reduction of
experience to familiar form.
Another renowned linguist, Blumfit (1985), in agreeing with Sapir
sees language as a relationship between words and experiences and it could be produced
and received in the form of verbalization of experience or experience of
verbalization. These two terms above have different meanings and they explain
language as a means of representing experiences. Henry Sweet, an English
phonetician and language scholar, states: "Language is the expression of
ideas by means of speech-sounds combined into words, Words are combined into
sentences, this combination answering to that of ideas into thoughts."
This paper wishes to adopt the definition of language by Azikiwe
(1998), who
On her part, asserts that:
Language
is simply a code whereby ideas of the user about the environment and the world
at large are represented through a conventional system of arbitrary signals for
communication.
A closed analysis of the definition above reveals that there are
some key words that adequately project what language truly is. These key words
are code, ideas, convention, system, and communication. This, in effect,
suggests that language is a code
which represents an idea; and a system which is a convention that is
used for communication.
Human language are sometimes learnt in formal situations and evaluation
is the parameter used to measure the successes or otherwise of the learning
process. Evaluation, according to Foyewa (2015), citing Adewuyi and Oluokun
(2001) is a process of gathering and interpreting evidence regarding the
problems and progress of learners in achieving desirable educational goals. The
above is in agreement with Okpala, Onocha & Oyedeji (1993) who say that
evaluation is a process of gathering valid information on the attainment of
educational objectives, analyzing and fashioning information to aid judgment on
the effectiveness of teaching or the educational objectives. Evaluation in any
educational enterprise is absolutely crucial as it assists in determining the
level of understanding and provides the opportunity of rating accordingly.
There are different forms of evaluation among which are projects, observation,
test and or examination. This paper focuses on the test component of evaluation
and all its entailments.
For some years, language testing research and second language
acquisition research have been viewed as distinct areas of inquiry in applied
linguistics. Bachman and Cohen (1998), however, posit that since the late
1980s, there has been an increasing number of studies in which the two subfields
of Applied Linguistics come together, both in terms of the substantive issues
being investigated and the methodological approach been used. Sajitha (2013) is
of the opinion that when students learn English as a Second Language, they face
various problems. These problems, he says, can be partially categorised as
problems caused by mother tongue interference and partially those caused by the
method of language teaching and assessment. One of the greatest curses of the
modern educational system is the lack of harmony between what is taught and
what is tested (Bachman and Cohen 1998). This paper sets out to analyse various
theories and practice of language testing in historical perspective and
examines the guiding principles of test generally. The paper also highlights
the problems and the prospects of test administration in linguistic study.
Forms and the
General Principles of Language Testing
Language testing has been classified into two major types. The
broad classification, according to Desheng and Varghese (2013), are: (i)
testing the language skills and (ii) testing the knowledge of the content.
Skill
Testing deals with testing the various language skills of listening,
speaking, reading and writing as well as the sub-skills such as comprehension,
vocabulary, grammar, spelling and punctuation. In Knowledge Testing, different types of tests are used
to determine the extent of the learners' knowledge in the language. Alabi and
Babatunde (2001) and Dasheng and varghese (2013) identify these forms of tests
to be Non-referential test, achievement test, diagnostic test, aptitude
test, and proficiency test.
i. The Achievement
test: helps the teacher to determine the
level of the learner's achievement
in the language class, that is, whether he has mastered the content he has been taught or not.
ii. Aptitude test: this test in a language situation is used to predict the ability of
a learner to learn a language. Though
this prediction may not be always sustain
as there may be factors such as teaching methods of the teacher, the availability of learning material, or the
learning environment that can either enhance
or retard this ability as predicted.
iii.
Proficiency test: this test aims
at measuring the language ability of the learner and determining the learner's readiness to undertake a
particular communicative task as
well as predicting the future language performance of the student.
iv. Diagnostic test: usually aims at finding out the strength and weaknesses of the learner in learning the language
skills. This is usually used to remedial purposes.
Due to the difference in the linguistic background of the learners, the manifest varying degrees of differences in
their ability to undertake certain
language task. The diagnostic test helps the teacher to identify each student's problem and strength
Alma (2013) asserts that a good test should have certain guiding
principles which should guide teachers when they wish to conduct one. Sajitha
(2015) lists the following seven principles as those that every good test
should possess. They include: validity, reliability, practicability, security,
wash back, transparency and usefulness.
i. Validity: A
communicative language learning approach must be matched by communicative
language testing. It should also have face validity which means that the test
should measure what it is supposed to, or what it sets out to measure. There
are different types of validity which include: face validity, content
validity, predictive validity, concurrent validity, and construct validity
ii. Reliability: Reliability
suggests the consistency of the test scores. The result of a test should be the
same if it is conducted at any other time. There should be consistency in the
format, content and time of the exam. Exam administration and the ambience in
which the test is conducted are also important.
iii. Practicality: The
practicality of the test can be obtained only when the tests are marked and the
students are given proper feedback.
iv. Security: It
is part of both reliability and validity.
v. Wash back: It refers to the effect of testing on teaching
and learning. The students accomplish the desired result when they perceive the
tests are markers of their progress.
vi. Transparency: Students
should be provided clear
accurate information which is known as transparency,
vii. Usefulness: It is an important quality of testing. This
means that a test must serve a particular purpose or usefulness. A good test
should stick on to all the above mentioned features. A language assessment
should stick on to the four skills. If the assessment is confined to one or two
skills, we will not recognize the skill in which a student excels or in which
he/ she keeps a low level of performance. Four skill assessments will be
beneficial for students of different intelligence level when the four skills of
language are tested.
The Concept of
Theory
Theory, according to Kerlinger (1973) is a set of interrelated
constructs (concepts), definitions, and propositions that presents a systematic
view of phenomena by specifying relations among variables with the purpose of
explaining and predicting the phenomena. Severin and Tankard (1982), on their
part, define theory as a set of ideas of systematic generalizations based on
scientific observation leading to further empirical observation. And Osuala
(1982) says that a theory is an attempt at synthesizing and integrating
empirical data for maximum clarification and unification. From the foregoing,
we can conclude that a theory is a generalization arrived at as a result of
organized analysis of interrelated variables about a situation.
To adequately understand a theory, a highlight of the features is
pertinent. These features, according to Osuala are that (i) a theory must have
the quality of parsimony, especially with the use of words; that is it must be
stated in simple
statement and in clear terms, (ii) it should be as applicable as
possible and must be grounded in empirical data which have been verified, (iii)
it should allow interpretations and deductions that can be tested empirically,
Language
Testing Theories in Historical Perspective
Alma (2013) is of the opinion that the history of language testing
is closely related to the historical development of theories of linguistics in
general. Spolsky (1976) identifies three historical periods of modern language
testing. These are pre-scientific, psychometric-structuralist, and
psycholinguistic-sociolinguistic. While Shohamy (1996), on his part, identifies
five stages of development. These, he names as the discrete point era, the
integrative era, the communicative era, the performance testing era and the
alternative assessment era. All these eras are reflections of philosophies,
viewpoints and trends of their time. Each of the eras is discussed below for a clear
picture of the theoretical foundations of language testing in general.
The First Era
Testing during this era, Spolsky (2005) says, is deeply rooted in
the pre-scientific phase, with tests of Confucian Doctrine until the beginning
of last century, when some basic concepts started to evolve. This is the stage
that Taber (2006) refers to as the pre-behaviourist when, according to him, the
first theory-based methods of second-language instruction started with Francis
Gouin in the mid-nineteenth century. And even though his work did not win
universal and lasting recognition, it set the stage for later theorists. During
this period, some methods of language teaching were evolved. Among them were
the following:
The Series Method
Gouin's theory of language acquisition rose out of his own failure
to learn German. His failure stemmed from his refusal to interact or converse
with native speakers of German while trying to learn the language. Imagine
trying to learn a foreign language by shunning interaction with the very people
who speak it. When he returned to his native home, France, disillusioned about
his failure, he discovered that during his twelve-month absence, his
three-year-old nephew had become miraculously fluent in French. He wondered how
a toddler could so easily outperform his own considerable intellect. He then
began to observe his nephew and other children who were in the process of
acquiring language. As a consequence, he was able to theorize that the language
one uses is related to one's actions at the time of the utterance. On these
bases, he develops the Series Method, which seeks to teach second
language by recreating conditions in which children learn a first language
Brown (2000). Specifically, the teacher does an activity-walking to the
door and simultaneously verbalizes the process of walking to the door:
"I walk toward the door. 1 draw
near to the door. I draw nearer to the door. I get to the door. I stop at the
door". The student then mimics the instructor. As time goes on, the
student is able to expand his/her linguistic skills: "Am I walking to the
door?" "Did I walk to the door?" "I am thinking about
walking to the door. "I am walking to the window."
The Direct Method
Second-language theorists maintain that the first real method of
language teaching was the Direct Method, which was developed as a reaction
against the monotony and ineffectiveness of grammar-translation classes. The
Direct Method, Taber (2006) says is the brainchild of Charles Berlitz, a
nineteenth-century linguist whose schools of language learning are famous
throughout the world. This borrows and applies Gouin's findings of the previous
generation, seeking to imitate his naturalistic approach. In light of Gouin's
miserable failure in German, Berlitz wanted to immerse students in the target
language. He believed, like Gouin, that one could learn a second language by
imitating, just the way children learn their first language; that is, directly
and without explanations of grammatical points and using only the target
language. Therefore, grammar was taught inductively. The objectives were
speaking and listening comprehension, not translation; for this reason,
vocabulary was introduced in context and through demonstrations and pictures;
and an emphasis was placed on correct usage and pronunciation. Students learned
to write by taking dictation in the target language.
A typical Direct Method class had few students. Students might
first take turns reading aloud, preferably a dialogue or anecdotal passage. To
test for understanding, the teacher would then ask questions in the target
language and students would have to respond appropriately in the target
language. Following the question-response session, the instructor might dictate
the passage to the students three times. Students would then read the dictation
back to the class. The Direct Method was popular in Europe and the United
States, especially during the first quarter of the twentieth century. However,
its very intensity and necessarily small class sizes made the method impossible
for public schools. In addition, it was considered a weak method because it was
not supported by heavy-duty theories and it depended too much on teachers'
ability to teach as well as their fluency in the target language. "So, it
was back to the old reliable grammar-translation method until behaviorism began
to shine its light on the field of second-language teaching"
(Brown2000:44). This period was when subjective tests became very popular with
teachers being the primary (and in most cases the only) assessors of the
linguistic competence of their students. As a result of this, according to Alma
(2013), there is no issue of reliability or validity.
Weir (2005) posits that in this phase, the experienced teachers would
score written essays or examine the students' orally (although with great limitations),
and their judgment on the competence was accepted and relied on. The overall
view of this phase was that 'everything was going well' (p.5).
The
Psychometrics Structuralist Era
Pavlov, Skinner, and Watson are the founders of the
behaviorism-based techniques employed in United States of America's classrooms
as well as the Audio-lingual Method of second-language instruction. Skinner's
theory of operant conditioning is based on the concept that learning results
from a change in overt behavior. Applied to language acquisition, one learns
language by emitting an utterance (operant), which is reinforced by a response
by another (consequence). If the consequence of the imitated behavior is
negative, the behavior is not repeated; if, on the other hand, the response is
positive, one repeats the behavior. Repetition then leads to habit formation.
Thus, behaviorists agree with the likes of Francis Bacon and John Locke that
one is born a tabula rasa, a blank slate, and all learning is the result of
outside stimuli. From this thinking sprang the popular Audio-lingual Method.
The Audio-lingual Method (ALM)
was first known as the Army Method because it had been adopted by the military
during the Second World War when it became evident that most Americans were
hopelessly monolingual. ALM is not unlike the Direct Method in that its purpose
is to teach students to communicate in the target language. The Audio-lingual
Method is a purely behavioristic approach to language teaching. It is based on
drill work that aims to form good language habits, and it makes use of
extensive conversation practice in the target language. Students enter the
target-language classroom with their cognitive slates entirely blank, at least
in theory, and they receive various linguistic stimuli and respond to them. If
they respond correctly, they enjoy a reward and repeat the response, which
promotes good habit formation. If they respond incorrectly, they receive no
reward and therefore repress the response, which represses the response. Its
theoretical support also comes from post-war structural linguists. Structural
linguists analyze how language is formed, not in a historical-descriptive, or
diachronic sense, but as it is "currently spoken in the speech
community" (Stafford 1995). Language was now seen as a set of abstract
linguistic units that made up a whole language system. The realization that all
languages are complex, unique systems allowed linguists to understand the multifaceted,
singular structure of English without comparing it to Latin, which had long
been the paragon of excellence among prescriptive grammarians. This led to new
thinking in terms of how language should be taught. Individual structures
should be presented one at a time and practiced via repetition drills. Grammar
explanations should be minimal or nonexistent, for students will learn
grammatical structures by inductive analogy.
A typical ALM class consists often-minute drill periods
interspersed with activities such as the reading and memorization of a
dialogue. The instructor then examines a grammar point by contrasting it with a
similar point in the students1 native language. (The teacher speaks
in the native language, but discourages its use among students.) This is
followed by more drills-chain drills, repetition drills, substitution drills.
Target language vocabulary is introduced and learned in context, and teachers
make abundant use of visual aids. Like its predecessors, ALM focuses on the
surface forms of language and rote learning. While some students, especially
those who could memorize dialogues, did well in the classroom, they still were
not able to use the target language with any proficiency.
The language testing developments became fully shaped in this era
from the middle of the last century, with discussions on the measurement of
human mental knowledge and the concerns of statistician Francis Y. Edgeworth
about fairness of
tests (Edgeworth, as cited by Spolsky, p. 171,). Language testing,
unlike other fields of study, was skeptical about achieving objectivity in
assessment. The main drawback to this was the discussion on linguistic
knowledge and whether that could be divided into measurable and statistically
assessed segments or not. Although these issues have not found complete
response to date and continue to be the subject of discussion of the division
of opinion, the second stage of the historical development of these discussions
took a clearer shape. Unlike the first phase, in the second phase, there was an
increased interest in theoretical concepts and a pool of linguists and experts
entered the field.
Fulcher (2000) citing Morrow (1979) calls this stage as "Lawn
of Tears" because of the obsessive efforts to reach objectivity, in macro
as well as micro-skills. Psychometrics, which flourished at the time, dealt
only with the reliability of tests and was interested in sophisticated formulae
to achieve that. Alma (2013) citing Shohamy (2007) says that, at that time,
nothing was mentioned about 'testing as an experience'. Nobody dealt with this
experience, its consequences and attitudes towards it. However, the
contribution of psychometrics has not completely lost the relation to the
social side of tests, but this connection is very limited. On the other hand,
as tests become more qualitative in measuring knowledge, the conclusions drawn
from tests results are more rigorous thereby reducing the undesirable social
impact (McNamara and Roever, 2006). For quite a while, the tests were far from
being social, but with the advent of communicative competence paradigm and
introduction in the game of the social context, tests have managed to the gaps
of these aspects.
The Integrated
Era
The third phase of theoretical developments in testing came as a
natural consequence of the new movement in linguistics, Communicative
Approach. Linguistic concepts about how students learn a foreign language
began to change radically with Chomsky (1965, 1970) who proposed the system of
knowledge based on linguistic rules and the difference between competence and
performance. To Chomsky, competence is knowledge of the ideal speaker/listener
on rules of language, and the performance was the actual use of language in
concrete situations. These developments in communicative approach, and the need
for tests that measure the productive language skills, led to the demands for
language tests that include performance.
According to McNamara (2000), language Professionals began to believe
that a language is more than a collection of separate elements that were tested
during psychometric-structuralist movement and that this tradition was focused
on the formal system of language, rather than in how the knowledge is used to
achieve a successful communicative act. This led to the development and design
of tests which integrated more of the skills of language. The feeling of
linguists is that if language is used for communicative purposes, then,
language testing should take into account all the language skills that enhance
effective communication.
The
Communicative Era
With the developments of the previous stages so far talked about,
the foundations of communicative approach in language teaching and testing were
laid. The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was the flavour of the decade
during the 1990s (Taber 2013). CLT does not teach about language, rather, it
teaches language. It is often associated with the Functional-Notional Approach;
that is, the emphasis is on functions such as time, location, travel,
measurements. In short, it seeks to recreate real-life social and functional
situations in the classroom to guide students toward communicative competence.
The issues this approach raised were not new in the realm of language testing,
but what it did was putting forward a serious effort into tackling them. Under
this new light, tests were not seen simply as linguistic tests per se, rather,
more factors were taken into consideration. These factors include the
individual taking the test, and the impact the test results had on his or her
life. The recent models raised questions on previous concepts of linguistic
knowledge and the way the tests were compiled to assess it. As
psycholinguistics, which dealt with the individual cognitive abilities, was
turning into 'the ephemeral fad', more and more linguists started to become
interested in testing the social dimension of language and its use (Alma, 2013)
This dimension was highlighted more by the surfacing of communicative approach,
which appeared after structuralist linguistics and behaviourist psychology of
the previous stage had failed to solve the problems of teaching and testing.
Fulcher (2000) believes that communicative testing initially came
as a response to the enormous importance of reliability and validity which were
lacking in the previous stages. Morrow (1979) states that reliability was the
requirement of objectivity and validity existed depending on the criteria that
were based on questionable assumptions. Redefinition of these two concepts
became an important task for testers of communicative testing. Shohamy (2001)
is of the opinion that a number of authors have begun to ask questions about
the social and ethical side to testing in much the same time. Consequently,
language testing took another direction.
Conclusion
Second-language instruction has come a long way since the days of
rote learning. Still, it has a long way to go. The trend since the late 1990s
has been towards eclecticism, which is a combination of some of these methods and
this is probably the healthiest approach for it accommodates many styles of
learning and endeavors to do more than elicit monosyllabic utterances from
students. In like manner, language testing and evaluation have reflected the
goal and method of instruction the learner receives. Furthermore, an eclectic
approach allows teachers to glean the effective elements from many methods that
really work in the classroom. A combination of a little of some methods can
create interesting activities and fun in the classroom and can give students a
sense of true accomplishment in the task given to them in the target language.
Language learning methodologies and testing certainly mirror the times in which
they thrive; but some have claimed to have virtues that are not evident beyond
their theoretical framework.
The eclectic approach takes the best that theorists have to offer
and incorporates it with techniques that work. Language testing needs to be
planned well to achieve the desired results. Observing the ethics of testing is
key in this regards. It is pertinent that the teacher knows that there are
factors that affect effectiveness of language testing. The students' attitudes
about the teaching methods the teacher employs, their home situations,
literacy, self-confidence, academic level, identification with their native
language are only a few factors that affect their ability to learn or acquire a
new language and do well in its testing. In the end, teachers have a tremendous
challenge in trying to give their students the tools with which to function on
all levels in the target language through the instrument of language testing
because in the words of McNamara and Shohamy (2008), "test has a strong
power.., can motivate students to learn and teachers to become more effective
in their instruction" (p. 90),
Bibliography
Akindele F. and Adegbite W. (2005); The Sociology and Politics
of English in Nigeria: An Introduction.
Ile-Ife: O.A.U. Press.
Alma C.V.(2015) "Developments in Language Testing with the
Focus on Ethics" In Journal of
Education and PracticeVol,6, No.32.
Anyanchonkeya N. & Anyanchonkeya C. (2006): The Anatomy of
English Studies, Owerri:
Chukwumeka Printers and Publishers.
Anyawu S. (2001) 'Nature of Language' in Amadi R, Anyawu S, and
Iruagba A. (Ed) Language
Education: Issues and Insights. Owerri: Barioz Publishers.
Azikiwe Uche (1998) Language Teaching and Learning. Onisha:
Africana-Fed publishers Ltd
Blumfit (1985) "Language and Literature Teaching from
Practice" ELT Document 102
on English as an International Language. London: The British Council.
Brown, H. D. (2000) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
New York: Longman.
Finegan Edward (2004) Language: Its Structure and Use Boston:
Thomson Wadsworth
Foyewa R.A. (2015) "Testing and evaluating English Language in
Teaching: A case of O level English in
Nigeria." In International Journal of English Language Teaching Vol. 3. No 6.
Fulcher, G. "Ethics
in Language Testing" Retrieved from http://taesig.8m.com/newsl.html
Kerlinger, FN. (1973) Foundation of Behavioural Research. New
York: Rinnchat and Wilson
Izuagba A.C. (2001) "The Functions of Language" In Amadi
R, Anyawu S, and
Iruagba A. (Ed) Language
Education: Issues and Insights. Owerri: Barioz Publishers.
Halliday M A K( 1975) Explorations in the Functions of Language.
London: Edward Arnold Ltd
McNamara, T. (2000) Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
McNamara, T. and C. Roever (2006) Language Testing: The Social
Dimension. Maiden, MA &
Oxford: Blackwell.
Ndimele Ozo-Mekuri (ed) (2001) Readings on Language. Port-Harcourt:
M J Grand Orbit Communications Ltd.
Okpala, P.N Onocha CO and Oyedeji O.A (1998) Measurement and
Evaluation in Education.
JaltuUzarue: Stirling Holden Publishers
Osuala E.C, (1987) Introduction to Research Methodology. Onitsha:
Africana feb Publisher.
Sapir E. (\92\)Language. New York: Harcourt Brace and World.
Serverin, W.J. and Tankar, JW. (2001) Communication Theories:
Origin, methods
and uses in the Mass
Media. New York: lomgman.
Shohamy, E. (2007) "Tests as power tools: Looking back,
looking forward".
Language testing
reconsidered, ed. J Fox, J.et al. University of Ottawa Press Shohamy, E.,
(2001) 'The Social Responsibility of the Language Testers. New
Perspectives and
Issues in Educational Language Policy, John Benjamins
Publishing Company,
Spolsky, B. (1995) Measured Words: The Development of Objective
Language
Testing. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
…. . . . . (1997) "The Ethics of Gatekeeping Tests: What have
We Learned in a
Hundred Years?" Language Testing Vol.14
No.3.
. . . . . . . (1995) Measured Words. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Stafford, Amy (1995) "Structural Linguistics: Its History, Contributions
and Relevance."
Taber, Joan "A Brief History of ESL Instruction: Theories,
Methodologies, and Upheavals"
(http://papersbyjoantaber.blogspot.com/2006/05/brief-history- of-esl-instruction.html
Udofot, I (2005): An Introduction to the Morphology of English, Ikot
Ekpene: D.U.C Press
Udofot, I. and Ekpenyong (2006) A Comprehensive English Course, Ikot
Ekpene: D.U.C Press.
Ukpana Ime D. (2004) Indigenous Musicians from Nigeria's Akwa Ibom
State Are prophet" Uyo Journal
of Humanities. Vol. 10
. . . (2003) "Career
Prospects in Music : The Case Nigerian Professionals " Uyo Journal of Humanities. Vol. 8. Pp
174-189
Yusuf Ore (2007)
Basic Linguistics. Port-Harcourt: M. J Grand Orbit Communication Ltd
No comments:
Post a Comment