The Washback Effect of the English National Examination (ENE) on English Teachers’ Classroom Teaching and Students’ Learning

  • Didi Sukyadi English Education Department, Faculty of Language and Arts Education, Indonesia University of Education, Dr. Setiabudhi 229, Bandung 40154
  • Ridha Mardiani Pasundan School of Teacher Training and Education, Cimahi Permana No 32 B, Kota Cimahi 40152
Keywords: washback, English National Examination, curriculum, teaching materials, teaching methods, classroom teaching, practice the test, teaching to test, test taking strategies


Since 2005, Indonesia has administered the National Examination (NE), from which the result is used as a basis to decide the students’ exit from secondary schools. As a high stake testing, the NE has caused various washback effects, both positive and negative. Consequently, the existence of the NE has been accompanied by heated debates and controversies. The pros believe that the NE may improve secondary education standards, while the cons argue that the NE will create injustice and unnecessary anxiety among the students. However, both the pros and cons base their arguments on common sense not supported by a sound reasoning. The present study tries to explore the washback effects of the English National Examination (ENE) in Indonesian secondary education context, involving three Secondary Schools categorized based on their NE achievement. The results of the study indicate that English teachers and students from the schools involved have different perceptions on the ENE. The English National Examination has an influential impact on teachers’ teaching in the aspect of: activity/time arrangement, teaching materials, teaching contents, teaching methods, teaching strategies, ways of assessing, and on the feelings and attitudes of the students. The ENE also affects the students’ learning in the classroom in which teachers mainly teach to test, practice the test and develop test-taking strategies. The dimensions of the washback effect of the ENE on both English teachers and students are negative and positive, strong, specific and for a short period time.


Download data is not yet available.


Alderson, C. J., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 115-129. [CrossRef]

Alderson, C. J., et al. (1995). Language test construction and evaluation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Alderson, C., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (1996). TOEFL preparation courses: A study of washback. Language Testing, 13(3), 280-297. [CrossRef]

Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. [CrossRef]

Bailey, K. M. (1996). Language teacher supervision. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Bailey, K. M. (1999). Washback in language testing. Retrieved May 2, 2008, from

Brown, D. H. (2004). Language assessment principles and classroom practices. Longman: Pearson Education

Brown, J. D. (2005). Testing in language programs. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies.

Cheng, L., & Curtis, A. (2004). Washback or backwash: A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. In L. Cheng, Y. Watanabe, & A. Curtis (Eds.), Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods (pp. 3-17). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cheng, L., & Watanabe, Y. (2004). Washback in language testing research contexts and methods. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cheng, L. (2005). Changing language teaching through language testing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fulcher, G., & Davidson, F. (2007). Language testing and assessment: An advanced resource book. Canada: Routledge Applied Linguistics.

Gates, S. (1995). Exploiting washback from standardized tests. In J. D. Brown, & S. O. Yamashita (Eds.), Language testing in Japan (pp. 101-106). Tokyo: Japanese Association for Language Teaching.

Greaney, V., & Kellaghan, T. (1996). Monitoring the learning outcomes of educational systems. Washing D. C.: The World Bank. [CrossRef]

Hawkey, R. (2006). Impact theory and practice studies of the IELTS test and Progetto Lingue 2000. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jones, M. G., Jones, B., & Hargrove, T. (1999). The unintended consequences of high stakes testing. Boulder: Rowman and Littlefield.

McNamara, T. (2000). Language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pizarro, M. A. (2009). Does the English teaching in the Spanish university entrance examination influence the teaching of English? English Studies, 90(5), 582-598. [CrossRef]

Shohamy, E. (1996). Test impact revisited: Washback effect over time. Language Testing, 13, 298–317. [CrossRef]

Smith, M. L. (1991). Put to the test: The effects of external testing on teachers. Educational Researchers, 20(5), 8-11.

Spratt, M. (2005). Washback and the Classroom: The Implications for teaching and learning studies of washback from exam. Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 5-29. [CrossRef]

Wall, D. (1993). The impact of national test on teaching: A cases study. Unpublished manuscript, Institute for English Language Education Lancaster University.
How to Cite
Sukyadi, D., & Mardiani, R. (2011). The Washback Effect of the English National Examination (ENE) on English Teachers’ Classroom Teaching and Students’ Learning. K@ta, 13(1), 96-111.