• Wojciech Malec Institute of English Studies, John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, Lublin
Keywords: language testing, web-based test construction, selected-response items, text-to-items converter, WebClass


This paper focuses on the role of technology in facilitating the process of language test development in online settings. In particular, it takes an in-depth look at one specific step in the entire testing cycle: the construction of (selected-response) test items with the aid of the text-to-items converter on WebClass, the author’s own online learning management system ( The text converter can be used to edit an entire set of questions in a single editor pane (similar to a word processor) and then submit them to a parsing script which converts them into test items proper. The main advantage of using the converter is time efficiency: instead of moving step-by-step from one item to the next (which may be time-consuming), a large number of test items can be created in one go.


Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language Testing in Practice: Designing and Developing Useful Language Tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bruno, J. E., & Dirkzwager, A. (1995). Determining the optimal number of alternatives to a multiple-choice test item: An information theoretic perspective. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 959–966.

Douglas, D. (2010). Understanding Language Testing. London: Hodder Education.

Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical Language Testing. London: Hodder Education.

Gierl, M. J., & Haladyna, T. M. (Eds.). (2013). Automatic Item Generation: Theory and Practice. New York and London: Routledge.

Haladyna, T. M. (2013). Automatic item generation: A historical perspective. In M. J. Gierl & T. M. Haladyna (Eds.), Automatic Item Generation: Theory and Practice (pp. 13–25). New York and London: Routledge.

Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S. M., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). A review of multiple-choice item-writing guidelines for classroom assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 15, 309–334.

Landrum, R. E., Cashin, J. R., & Theis, K. S. (1993). More evidence in favor of three-option multiple-choice tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 771–778.

Malec, W. (2012). WebClass [learning management system]. Retrieved from

Malec, W. (2015). Testing collocational knowledge: the question of item format. In A. Bloch-Rozmej & K. Drabikowska (Eds.), Within Language, Beyond Theories: Studies in Applied Linguistics (pp. 74–92). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Parshall, C. G., Spray, J. A., Kalohn, J. C., & Davey, T. (2002). Practical Considerations in Computer-Based Testing. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Plannedparrothood (n. d.). Retreived from

Roever, C. (2001). Web-based language testing. Language Learning & Technology, 5(2), 84–94.

Trevisan, M. S., Sax, G., & Michael, W. B. (1994). Estimating the optimum number of options per item using an incremental option paradigm. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 86–91.

Webclass (a) (n. d.). Retrieved from

Webclass (b) (n. d.). Retrieved from

Webclass (c) (n. d.). Retrieved from

Webclass (d) (n. d.). Retrieved from; the text in the editor area adapted from

Webclass (e) (n. d.). Retrieved from