Do I test what I teach? : Testing legal vocabulary - Practical examples and analysis of various vocabulary test tasks
Abstract
Do I test what I teach? Testing legal vocabulary : Practical examples and analysis of various vocabulary test tasks.
Although a legal English course is not usually reduced to the acquisition of the industry-specific vocabulary, when it comes to assessing students' knowledge, we often resort to the testing of legal vocabulary. I assume it is so for practicality reasons. In this respect, we can agree with opponents of English for Special Purposes who say that there are universal skills and forms of language common to various disciplines, professions, or purposes; therefore, there is no need to test listening and speaking separately as they are covered by general English Exams. Things are different with respect to legal vocabulary as there is no universal legal language, more so if the languages stem from different legal traditions. Personally, I think that legal writing with its particularities which cannot be captured by a general English exam should be tested as well, however, for practicality reasons, assessment of writing as a part of a mandatory language course is left out in our department. With a few practical examples from my own experience, I would like to analyse usefulness of various types of tasks aimed at testing legal vocabulary, particularly derivations, prepositions, reading comprehension, gap-fills, and translations, and suggest possible improvements or alternatives.