Standard language tests

Here is the podcast

What is the purpose of standard language tests like TOEFL, TOEIC, JLPT, IELTS the Cambridge exams etc. I wonder. Japan is the world leader in taking the TOEIC test, with around 2 million testers. Many foreign students take TOEFL before coming to North America. Does this test taking help them speak English better?

If I were to recruit someone for a job, I would just ignore any standard test results. I would look at their written letter and resume, and then talk to them. If I were admitting someone to university, I guess these tests could be a minimum indicator, but I want to see something written by that person, as well as an audio file of that person speaking. I guess they can fake these things, but then if they are admitted based on falsified test results, the will fail and I guess may just have to go home.

I mean we are not talking about doctors or electricians or engineers here. We do not need some "objective" finely defined measurement of skill level. We just need to find out if people can communicate. Even when I look for translators I go to ProZ.com and get a lot of applicants offering to translate into just about any language. I ask them to do a trial, and select one. I never look at any scores or levels on some standard language test.

Comments

[Jayan]

Hi steve
it is an interesting podcast. you have mentioned in this podcast that the Janpan is not one of the leading country in their ability in commuicating in English. I am curious to know which country is the leader in terms of communicating among the non-native country as well as what is status of the India in terms of the number of students taking TOEC test and their commucating ablity. Just curious to know.

Thank you

Bye jayan

[UmmAbdrahmaan]

Hello Stephen,

I just discovered your blog as I was looking for online materials on public speaking and writing academic papers.

I like your analogy of language learning to a love affair! I might use it one day as a prelude as well as a motivation for my students' learning the English language.

In regard to language testing, when I first sat for TOEFL more than 20 years ago, I could hardly speak or write. My score was only 490 but lucky enough to get admitted at a university in USA with the condition that I enrolled in intensive English class for writing and reading.

When I applied for graduate study, a decade later, I sat for another modified IELTS (local content as I did my graduate study locally)and scored 7.5 on average.

I was blind when I sat for TOEFL and I had 20/20 eyesight when I sat for IELTS. If the university entrance is based on writing ability and fluency as you would have done, I would not have a chance as my English language learning was lopsided heavily towards grammar drill and reading comprehension.

Ironically, now I am an English language lecturer. Teaching certainly motivates me to learn more.

regards
UmmAbdrahmaan

[David]

Hey Steve,

I liked your comments about standardized tests. I live in Taiwan and 1000s of students take such tests for studying abroad and cannot communicate comfortably in English. I'm interested in Thai and Cantonese podcasts. Do you do that?

Thanks,
David
www.freechineseblog.com

[Jeff]

You're definitely right, Steve...if I were considering who to hire for a particular job, I would want a writing sample in that language (about a task related to the job duties/responsibilities), and I would want to have a conversation/interview with them in that language. That's really the only way to be sure about their language abilities.

I personally don't think that those tests help gauge what level a student is at in a language. I am a firm believer that some students simply perform poorly on standardized tests. Standard language tests, I'm sure, are no different in that trend.

[Nau]

Dear Steve,

I must say that there is a name in Spanish for the "necessity" of having a certificate that proves your knowledge of every subject: "titulitis";) That is why many people concentrate so much on these tests without a real interest in the language.

However, I have always thought that the "good point" of TOEFL is its two years validity. Don't you think that there is a difference between tests that "last forever" and those that only "confirm" your knowledge for the current moment? The last ones seem to make it easier for firms or university to choose their people. It will take them too long to interview everyone.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Nau,

I do not believe that people lose their language skills once they have achieved a certain level. If a certain TOEFL score does, in fact, mean that a person has enough English to attend university, then the person will not easily lose those language skills, A few weeks at an English speaking university wold quickly refresh them. The question is rather how useful the test is period. Having people write the test every two years is just good business strategy for TOEFL.

As for university degrees, the technical disciplines usually require regular further training, since these fields are constantly changing. This is not true in the humanities.

[Ty]

Interesting. I've met people with high TOEFL and TOEIC scores who couldn't communicate effectively in (spoken) English. I've also met a few people who could. And I know a number of people who have passed levels 2 and 1 of the JLPT and can speak, read, and write the language VERY well.

It all depends on the test and the person, I guess.

[Steve Kaufmann]

well of course there is a correlation between results these tests and language proficiency. However, they are not a guarantee, and the amount of time spent on them and preparing for them is, in my view, not all that helpful to language learning.

I like TOEIC over TOEFL because it is simpler and cheaper. I would have a cloze test with a high pass fail threshold. Anyone who passes that can move on to an oral and written test.

I like the idea of a portfolio where people can keep writing they have done, recordings or videos of themselves speaking the language, and some measure of the number of words they know, as measured in a cloze test. The portfolio should also mention the activities that the person has undertaken in the language..living, working, studying etc. in the language, books read etc.

[Nau]

Dear Steve,

I see I have focused on other aspect of the tests. I agree with you that the two years time is a good business strategy, but I also think that one's language level changes all the time. It can improve, but also get worse. Of course, you are not going to forget everything that you have learned if you do not use the language in, let´s say, two years, but you are going for sure to need some time to achieve the previous stage.

It is always very difficult to rate somebody's language proficiency. Nevertheless, I have heard something about the "European Language Portfolio", this seems to be more close to your ideas. The learner takes a very active role in it.

[Roni]

Dear Steve,

I'm a bit late in replying to this thread, but it seems to be something quite relevant to me.

Recently, I took entrance exams for the music conservatoires here in Andalucia. All of the entrance exams were, of course, in Spanish. I guess I owe you at LingQ a good deal of thanks for that since I was accepted(!).

Conservatoires in Spain are not universities so they didn't have any kind of language test or expect me to have done any. The test I did have to do were those for people without any high-school certificates and one for people without a high-school certificates in music. I, being English didn't have any Spanish qualifications.

What they had was an 'ejercicio específico humanístico', in which I had to read a text, summarise it, answer a few questions on it and write my own opinion , then write an essay on the 1st World War. I had to do other tests on music and also conduct the audition/interview in Spanish.

These are exactly the same tests that the Spanish people in the same position as me with no titulos had to do. I had no direct grammatical examination, just a test to see how well I could understand and express myself in language, not specifically Spanish.

What do you think, Steve? Shouldn't non-native speakers just be tested in the same way that native speakers are? Maybe my use Spanish tenses is not near enough as I (and an average examiner) would like yet, but definitely understand enough of what I hear and read and have the tools to express myself very well. Surely that's all we should be testing, isn't it?