The purpose of this study is to present underlying principles and criteria for designing and developing National English Ability Test (NEAT). To this end, this study presents 5 principles (i.e., Connection, Authenticity, Interactiveness, IBT Compatibility, Washback Effectiveness) which play guiding and controlling roles in developing and selecting item types appropriate for the listening and the reading test of NEAT derived from test usefulness (Bachman & Palmer, 1996). Also, it proposes 4 criteria (i.e., Complementarity, Integration, Pivotality, and Hierarchicality) which function levering roles in designing and developing the two tests of NEAT on the basis of the empirical data of the item analyses of Foreign (English) domain of College Scholastic Ability Tests (2005~2010 school year). Finally, it discusses some implications and applications of the principles and the criteria to a theoretical blueprint for establishing an item developing system and a test implementation system, setting up the criteria of validating item types, designing a modular type of test specifications, and specifying a complementary type of test specifications for the two ability-level listening and reading tests (the 2nd and the 3rd rank) of NEAT.

This study investigates secondary school English teachers’ perceptions and psychological burdens involved in the implementation of the speaking and writing tests of the National English Ability Test, which is being developed by the Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology. The study surveyed 138 secondary school English teachers in Seoul. Although more than half of the teachers were aware of the new test, 18% of the surveyed teachers were not aware of the fact that speaking and writing skills would be assessed in the new test. Also, 22.7% of the teachers were opposed to the productive skills test. More than half (56.2%) of the teachers felt some psychological burdens toward the inclusion of the speaking/writing tests. Although the teachers admitted that serving as raters for the new test would help improve their teaching, the majority of them were reluctant to participate in the actual rating process. The teachers felt that the difficulty of subjective rating and the lack of time for the speaking and writing tests were serious problems in implementing the new test. The teachers were sensitive toward the students’ test anxiety. They also indicated that they feel a strong psychological burden when making judgments on the students' performances. Implications and suggestions are made based on the findings.