‘Remark or retake’? A study of candidate performance in IELTS and perceptions towards test failure

Abstract

It is becoming increasingly important for individuals for whom English is a second language to demonstrate their linguistic credentials for academic, work and employment purposes. One option is to undertake International English Language Testing System (IELTS), which involves attempting to meet the linguistic entrance criteria set by a gatekeeping institution in the skills of listening, reading, writing, and speaking. Yet limited information is available in the public domain concerning the success of test-takers in meeting cutoff criteria set by the 10,000 or so organisations that utilise IELTS. The present study analyses the relationship between the test results and stated band score objectives of a cohort of 600 IELTS candidates, who shared their results on a social networking platform. It was uncovered that more test-takers failed to meet their band score goals (n = 281) than achieved them (n = 245), with many requiring high level linguistic goals to maximise their prospects in immigration systems. Thematic analysis was employed to explore the seldom-heard perspectives of the test-takers who missed their targets, and thereby 'failed' the IELTS test. Far more candidates held perspectives that constituted a rejection of their overall or sub-test score in comparison with those who were accepting of their results. Candidates' incredulity was notably acute concerning the accuracy of Speaking and Writing assessment, likely fuelled by a mistrust in single examiner marking and a lack of detailed test performance feedback to explain what went wrong.

Exploring the relationships between various dimensions of receptive vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading comprehension

“…The International English Language Testing System (IELTS) is a standardized English test globally used for assessing English language proficiency of the test takers in various contexts such as education, employment, and immigration (Fernandez, 2018). The IELTS was jointly developed by the British Council, The University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate (UCLES) and IDP Education Australia (Pearson, 2019;Quaid, 2018). The IELTS listening test is made up of 40 questions divided into four major sections.…”

Student Engagement with Teacher Written Feedback on Rehearsal Essays Undertaken in Preparation for IELTS

“…It was evident Min Jung and Yuri’s feelings of frustration and disappointment also stemmed from lower-than-expected written performance. IELTS test-takers’ assumption of linear gains across multiple test undertakings and confusion with inconsistent scores is documented in the literature (Hamid, 2016; Pearson, 2019). It may have been accentuated in the present study since the learners had recruited outside expertise to supplement existing preparation activities and implicitly expected progression over the project.…”

“…Prior research has shown the practice of undertaking rehearsal tasks in simulated test conditions is a central feature of self-directed and teacher-led IELTS Writing preparation (Allen, 2016; Chappell et al, 2019; Hu & Trenkic, 2019; Mickan & Motteram, 2009; Smirnova, 2017). Rehearsal essays are popular with candidates because they provide opportunities to self-evaluate test format familiarity (Pearson, 2019), enhance understanding of typical topics and prompt frames (Coffin, 2004; Craven, 2012), and practice skills and strategies used to lower the burden of test taking (Chappell et al, 2019; Winke & Lim, 2014). Nevertheless, improving future test performance via rehearsal essay writing is not assured.…”

“…In order to meet test-user determined cut-off scores, many candidates undertake self-directed or teacher-led IELTS preparation (Alsagoafi, 2018; Chappell et al, 2019; Gan, 2009; Hu & Trenkic, 2019; Winke & Lim, 2014), a key feature of which is simulated practice test tasks (Allen, 2016; Chappell et al, 2019; Hu & Trenkic, 2019; Mickan & Motteram, 2009). Test-takers perceive feedback from a provider with expertise (usually a teacher or successful test veteran) on simulated writing tasks integral to enhancing performance (Pearson, 2019), particularly since IELTS Writing is underscored by certain idiosyncrasies that do not cohere with the expectations of academic writing generally, (see Moore & Morton, 2005). Yet the extent test-takers make sense of and respond to comprehensive, unfocused CFWF and FFWF to develop language and writing skills in preparation for high-stakes English writing assessment is largely unknown.…”

A Rasch-based validation of the Vietnamese version of the Listening Vocabulary Levels Test

“…The present study employed the International English Language Testing System (IELT S), a standardized and globally accepted English test widely used for assessing English language proficiency of the test takers in a great variety of contexts such as education, employment, and immigration as an instrument for the measurement of participants' English listening proficiency. The IELTS was jointly developed by the British Council, The University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate (UCLES), and IDP Education Australia (Pearson, 2019;Quaid, 2018). There were four parts in the IELTS listening test: parts 1 and 2 included a conversation and a prompted monologue with transactional purposes and parts 3 and 4 consisted of a discussion dialogue and a monologue in academic contexts (Alavi et al, 2018;Phakiti, 2016).…”