Running head: IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
IELTS: A Test Review
Patrick Dane Carson
EDUC 8540: Language Assessment
Kathleen Bailey, Ph.D.
October 2, 2013
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
2
“Research in reading, like testing more generally, be likened to opening Pandora’s box. Once it
is unlocked a vast array of questions clamour to be answered, some of which will require
detailed intensive study on specific areas.” – Weir, 2009
Like testing generally, reviewing a test such as the English Language Testing System
(IELTS), be likened to opening Pandora’s box. Once the specimen materials, handbook, and
guidelines for testing and admissions personnel have been opened, a vast array of questions
clamor to be answered, many of which require further, detailed, and intensive investigation.
With the box now open, this review presents the International English Language Testing System
with the objectives of: 1) painting a general picture of the test (history, test development,
reliability, pricing, etc.); 2) shedding light upon test administration (how does it work, clarity of
instructions, worthiness of effort); 3) reviewing the scoring system (how scores are
derived/reported, score interpretation, etc.); 4) analyzing the IELTS in light of Swain’s four
principles, and Wesche’s four components.
The International IELTS is a high-impact test (micro/macro levels) available in two
versions (Academic or General Training) depending on a test takers aims. This review
investigates the Academic Test format of the IELTS which consists of listening, speaking,
reading, and writing components (all candidates take the same listening and speaking
components but different reading and writing components according to format) (IELTS, 2013a).
The IELTS is recognized as the world’s most widely used criterion-referenced, high-stakes
English language proficiency test, for higher education and immigration. With more than two
million tests taken in 2012, at 900 testing locations, available for an in-country fee, in more than
130 countries, the IELTS has been a success (IELTS, 2013a). Cost varies per testing location
(e.g. $205.00 in San Francisco) and includes a central (UCLES, The British Council/IELTS
Australia) and local (test center) fee to cover all parties costs (UCLES, 2001, p. 17).
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
3
Considering the IELTS popularity, it is not surprising that with an ever-increasing
international student population, that “there has been a corresponding increase in the use of the
language test to screen applicants for language ability” (Green, 2007, p. 75) who desire to study
in English-speaking universities or institutions of higher and further education. Among tertiary
institutions around the world, the IELTS is intended “to find out whether candidates are ready to
study or train in the medium of English” (Wallace, 1997, p. 370) and is accepted as evidence of
English language proficiency by over 8,000 organizations worldwide (IELTS, 2013a). The
IELTS, which is owned by the “University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate
(UNCLES), The British Council and IDP Education Australia” (UCLES, 2001, p. 2) is the most
widely recognized test of English for academic purposes in the UK and, although requirements
differ by institution, universities will typically require a score of 6 or 7 on the nine band IELTS
scale for unconditional entry (Green, 2007, p. 76).
History
In 1980, The British Council replaced the English Proficiency Test Battery (EPTB)
which, at that time, had been in been in operation for fifteen years, with a new test in response to
changes in language teaching theory, language learning, and developments in language testing.
The new test was called the English Language Testing Service (ELTS), and was introduced into
the overseas student recruitment operation of The British Council (UCLES, 2001, p. 6). The
ELTS test offered six modules covering five areas of study of UK tertiary and one general
module. The six modules were: Life Sciences, Social Studies, Physical Sciences, Technology,
Medicine, and General Academic.
From 1980 to 1989 the ELTS test format remained unchanged, but out of concern for
practical difficulties with the administration of the test, The British Council had good reason to
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
4
change the test. In 1987, The British Council and UCLES commissioned Edinburgh University
to perform validation study (UCLES, 2001, p. 6). Following the report of the ELTS Revision
Project, a consensus was reached to broaden the international participation of the project. At that
time, the International Development Program of Australian Universities and Colleges (IDP),
currently known as IDP Education Australia, joined The British Council and UCLES in an
international partnership to revise the test (UCLES, 2001, p. 6). The revision team recommended
that the test should be simplified and shortened which led to the reduction of six to three subject
modules, and the establishment of the General Module. The result of the revision was called the
IELTS which became operational in 1989 (UCLES, 2001, p. 6).
Beginning in 1989 IELTS test takers “took two non-specialized modules, Listening and
Speaking, and two specialized modules, Reading and Writing. The non-specialized modules
tested general English while the specialized modules were intended to test skills in particular
areas suited to a candidates chosen course of study” (UCLES, 2001, p. 7). By 1995 the
popularity of the IELTS had significantly increased and in response to developments in applied
linguistics, measurement, and teaching practices, the test was once again revised in April 1995.
Accordingly to UCLES, the following revisions enhanced the security and administration of the
IELTS:

The field-specific Reading and Writing Modules A, B, and C were replaced with
ONE Academic Reading Module and ONE Academic Writing Module. Details
of the research behind this change to the test design can be found in Clapham
(1996) who concluded that the different subject modules did not appear justified
in terms of accessibility to specialists. In addition, the thematic link between the
reading and writing act ivies was also removed to avoid consuming the
assessment and reading ability with that of writing ability.

General Training Reading and Writing Modules were brought into line with the
Academic Modules in terms of timing allocation, length of written responses, and
reporting of scores. The difference between the Academic and General Training
Modules is in the nature of the micro-skills tested not in the scales of ability.
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW

5
Measures were introduced to gather data on test performance and candidate
background so that issues of fairness relating to test use and users could be more
effectively monitored. (2001, p. 7).
In 1998 a project to revise the Speaking Test was launched and the revised IELTS
Speaking Test was introduced in July of 2001. In 1997, a computerized version of the IELTS
(CBIELTS) was launched in line with the commitment of the IELTS partners to respond to
developments in technology and test development industry. Most recently, in January of 2005,
new assessment criteria for the Writing Test were implemented (IELTS, 2013a). The current
IELTS retains many features of the 1980 ELTS, although certain features, such as the link
between theme and content papers have not survived the revisionary process. Nonetheless, the
distinction between the Academic Test and the General Test has remained unchanged and is
likely to be an everlasting feature of the International English Language Testing System.
Description of the Listening Section of the IELTS
The listening portion of the IELTS is the first component completed by a candidate. This
module is 30 minutes in length and includes recorded monologues and conversations that require
test takers to mark their answers while simultaneously listening to the stimuli. The IELTS
listening module1 “comprises four sections that evaluate test takers’ ability to understand spoken
English in different contexts” (Aryadoust, 2012, p. 43). Sections one and two “evaluate
comprehension of everyday conversation, and sections 3 and 4 assess comprehension of
academic discourse” (Aryadoust, 2012, p. 43).
Section one exposes candidates to a conversation and “tests their understanding of
specific and factual information; section 2 has the same assessment objective as section 1, but the
stimulus is a short radio talk or an excerpt from a monologue” (Aryadoust, 2012, p. 43). Section
1
See Appendix A for sample Listening materials
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
6
three is a “conversation which involves negotiation of meaning [and] listening for specific
information, attitudes, and speakers’ opinions” (The University of Cambridge ESOL
Examination Syndicate, n.d.) in an academic context. Section four, has the same assessment
objective as section 3, but the stimulus is an academic monologue.
Each section contains ten test items, which, according to Aryadoust, fall into seven types:
“(a) forms/notes/table/flow-chart/summary completion, (b) multiple-choice questions (MCQs),
(c) short-answer questions, (d) sentence completion, (e) labeling a diagram/plan/map, (f)
classifying, and (g) matching” ( 2012, p.43). In the listening module, the multiple choice
questions do not require candidates to generate the correct answer on their own, but in item types
C and item type D, test takers must produce their own response to answer items of that format.
Description of the Reading Section of the IELTS
The Reading Module of the IELTS2 is the second component completed by test takers.
The Academic Reading Module is designed to assess a candidates reading ability to understand
texts that they are likely to encounter in English-medium colleges and universities (UCLES,
2001, p. 10). As well, the Academic Reading Module contains 40 questions pertaining to
reading passages which range between 2,000 and 2,750 words in length (UCLES, 2001, p. 10).
Candidates have 60 minutes to complete the Academic Reading test which requires “testtakers to complete notes, summaries, and a range of iconic, presentations (diagrams, flow-charts,
tables) using what they have read” (Weir et al, 2009, p. 104). Furthermore, candidates are also
required to “identify information in the text, identify writers’ views or claims, and summarize
paragraphs or text sections” (Weir et al, 2009, p. 104).
A variety of texts are used from magazines, journals, books and newspapers, which are
intended for a non-specialist audience (UCLES, 2001, p. 10). The texts utilized in the Academic
2
See Appendix B for samples of the IELTS reading module
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
7
Reading test are considered to be topics of “general academic interest” that “deal with issues
which are intrinsically interesting, recognizably appropriate and accessible to candidates entering
postgraduate or undergraduate courses” (UCLES, 2001, p. 10). The IELTS Academic Reading
test appears to be multi-dimensional in construct which suggests that it measures a range of
reading skills.
Description of Writing Section of the IELTS
The Academic Writing Module3 is a direct test of writing “in which tasks are
communicative and contextualized for a specific audience, purpose, and genre” (Uysal, 2009, p.
315). Candidates are provided sixty minutes in which they must complete two tasks. The first
writing task should consist of at least 150 words, and the second writing task should consist of at
least 250 words (UCLES, 2001, p. 11). There is no choice of topics, however IELTS maintains
“the topics are of general interest and require no subject-specific knowledge of the candidates”
(UCLES, 2001, p. 11).
The Academic Writing Module assesses writing ability appropriate to educational
contexts. Candidates are tested on their ability to carry out different tasks which require
appropriate vocabulary, grammar, content, and structure choice, while demonstrating audience
awareness and overall communicative effectiveness (UCLES, 2001, p. 11). The Academic
Writing test is designed “to provide sufficient accessible input so as to elicit a suitable sample of
writing for assessment purposes” (UCLES, 2001, p. 11). The University of Cambridge Local
Examinations Syndicate summarizes the Academic Writing test as follows:
Task 1candidates are asked to look at a diagram or table, and to present the information it
contains in their own words. Depending on the type of input, candidates are assessed on
their ability to: organize, present and sometime compare data; describe the stages of a
process or procedure; describe an object or event or sequence of events; explain how
something works.
3
See Appendix C for samples of the Academic Writing test
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
8
Task 2 candidates are presented with a point of view, argument or problem and are
assessed on their ability to: present a problem; present and justify and opinion; compare
and contrast evidence, opinions and implications; evaluate and challenge ideas, evidence
or an argument (UCLES, 2001, p. 11).
Description of the Speaking Section of the IELTS
The Speaking Module4 is a test of speaking in the context of general English proficiency
appropriate to educational, training, and social contexts. It is designed to measure linguistic and
communicative skills needed for effective oral communication (UCLES, 2001, p. 12). In the
Speaking test, a candidate will “have a discussion with a certified Examiner. It is interactive and
as close to a real-life situation as a test can get” (IETLS, 2013a).
The test is comprised of three parts and can range from 11 to 14 minutes in length. In
Part 1, candidates answer questions about themselves, their family, interests, and related topics.
In Part 2, candidates are given a verbal prompt on a card and asked to speak to a topic of
personal relevance. Candidates are given one minute of preparation time before they are
required to speak for one to two minutes Once the candidate has completed their turn, the
examiner then asks one or two rounding-off questions (UCLES, 2001, p. 12). In Part 3, the
candidate and examiner discuss more abstract issues relevant to the topic prompt in Part 2. Part
three discussions last four to five minutes (UCLES, 2001, p. 12).
All interviews are audio recorded to provide a record of the test takers performance
which is rated for “Fluency and Coherence, Lexical Resource, and Grammatical Range and
Accuracy” and Pronunciation (Carey et al., 2010, p. 205). There are three parts to the Academic
Speaking test, each of which fulfills a specific function in terms of assessing patterns of
interaction, task input, and candidate output (IELTS, 2013a).
4
See Appendix D for Speaking Test samples
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
9
Scoring System
The IELTS is a secure test designed to assess English language proficiency. IELTS
adheres to a detailed code for test delivery to candidates which safeguards against identity fraud.
Two parts of the test are double marked, examiners are certified based on assessment standards,
and every test version is different so no candidate can ever sit the same test twice. Furthermore,
the British Council, IDP, and UCLES have strict protocols for all aspects of test design, delivery,
and administration (IELTS, 2013d) to ensure test security.
There is no “pass or fail” in the IELTS, rather test takers are graded on their performance
using scores ranging from 1 to 9 for each part of the test (IELTS, 2013b). Thereafter, the
Listening, Reading, Writing, and Speaking results “then produce an overall Band Score5” which
can be reported in whole and half bands ranging from one to nine. The overall band score
provide descriptive synopsis of the candidate’s linguistic ability (IELTS, 2013b). However,
“how these descriptors are turned into band scores is kept confidential” (Uysal, 2009, p. 315).
In terms of how overall Band Scores are reported, “for the avoidance of doubt, the
following rounding convention applies: if the average across the four skills ends in .25, it is
rounded up to the next half band, and if it ends in .75, it is round up to the next whole band”
(IELTS, 2013a). For example, if a candidate is marked 6.5 for Listening, 6.5 for Reading, 5.0
for Writing, and 7.0 for Speaking, the candidate would receive an Overall Band Score of 6.5 (25
÷ 4 = 6.25 = Band 6.5) (IELTS, 2013b). The IELTS Listening and Reading Modules each
contain 40 items which are awarded one mark per correct answer (40 being the maximum raw
score possible). Band scores are given to test takers on the basis of their raw score6. The IELTS
5
See Appendix E for Band Score descriptors
See Appendix F for a table which indicates the mean raw score achieved by candidates of various levels in each of
the Listening, Academic Reading, and General Training Reading tests for an indication of the number of marks
required for a particular band score.
6
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
10
test results are available thirteen days after the test is completed and each candidate is entitled up
to five copies of the Test Results Form (TRF); additional copies of the TRF are available at cost.
In terms rater reliability, which Bailey (1998) defines as “the consistency with which
raters use a scoring system” (p. 247), IELTS accounts for intrarater reliability (“which is
determined by having the same person evaluate the same data on two different occasions and
comparing the results to see how similar they are” (Bailey, 1998, p. 247)), by training test
markers to “understand the IELTS marking policy” which requires that they “demonstrate that
they are marking to standard before they are allowed to mark” (IELTS, 2013a). Furthermore,
IETLS Markers are retested every two years to ensure that their markings meet policy standard.
Analysis
Language testing is an uncertain and approximate business at the best of times, even if, to
the outsider, this may be camouflaged by its impressive, even daunting, technical (and
technological) trappings, not to mention the authority of the institutions whose goal tests
serve. Every test is vulnerable to good questions. (McNamara, 2000, p. 86)
In analyzing the Academic version of the IELTS, I used frameworks developed by
Wesche (1983) and Swain (1984) for test analysis. For each framework, a table has been
developed that incorporates the corresponding component or principle. The following analysis
discusses how Wesche’s components and Swain’s principles can be used to decamouflage the
impressive and daunting nature of the International English Language Testing System.
Wesche’s Framework
In 1983 Wesche wrote, “all tests are samples of behaviour, intended to reflect whether the
examinee possesses certain knowledge, or to predict whether he or she can perform certain acts.
Tests generally consist of a number of items, each composed of stimulus material and a related
task which requires a response on the part of the examinee. Responses are then scored according
to certain criteria” (p. 43). Of particular salience are the key components: stimulus material,
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
11
task, response, and criteria. Fifteen years later, retouching upon the importance of Wesche’s
components, Bailey (1998) addressed the four components in more elaborated accessible
language.
Stimulus material. Stimulus material, as defined by Bailey (1998) “refers to whatever
linguistic or nonlinguistic information is presented to the learners to get them to demonstrate the
skills of knowledge we want to asses” (p. 13). In the IELTS stimulus materials consist of a
variety of question, text, and task types7.
Tasked posed to the learner. The task posed to the learner refers to “that which must be
done by a test taker to demonstrate his skill and/or knowledge, thereby successfully completing a
test item or prompt” (Bailey, 1998, p. 248). The IELTS requires candidates to perform a wide
range of reading skills, listening skills, writing skills, and speaking skills8.
Learner’s response. The learner’s response is “the test-taker’s actions in response to the
task that is posed by a prompt or an item; the observable manifestation that he or she can indeed
do the mental task that has been set for him or her” (Bailey, 1998, p. 245). Across the four
Modules, test takers are required to respond in various ways: speaking, writing, reading, and
listening9.
Scoring criteria. Candidates scores are reported on a nine point band score across each
of the four Modules of the IELTS. Each band score10 is accompanied by a description which
reflects the candidate’s respective skill proficiency according to performance11.
See Appendix G for more detailed information on Stimulus Material within the table of Wesche’s Components.
See Appendix G for more detailed information on Task posed to the learner within the table of Wesche’s
Components.
9
See Appendix G for more detailed information on Learner’s Response within the table of Wesche’s Components.
10
See Appendix E for complete band score description.
11
See Appendix G for more detailed information on Scoring Criteria within the table of Wesche’s Components.
7
8
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
12
Swain’s Framework
According to Swain (1984), there are four general principles relevant “when faced with
the practical problems of developing a communicative test of speaking and writing that could be
administered on a large scale, and that could be sensitive to a wide range of proficiency levels”
(p. 188). As such, Swain’s four principles that test developers need to consider when designing a
communicative test are: start from somewhere, concentrate on content, bias for best, and work
for washback.
Start from somewhere. This idea means that “assessment should be based on sound
theoretical principles. It entails having a clear understanding of the construct we are trying to
measure and designing our assessment procedures to match that understanding” (Bailey, 1998, p.
154). The IELTS purports to assess general English proficiency in all four modules. To an
extent this is true, but after further investigation, the literary treatment of construct is concerning
because it is seemingly insufficient12 (evidence that explicates construct in stakeholder literature
is hard to come by).
Concentrate on content. Concentrating on content means that “assessment devices
should be appropriate in terms of the age, proficiency level, interests, and goals of the learners”
(Bailey, 1998, p. 154). At face value, the IELTS is seemingly appropriate in terms of the
preceding ideas, yet, after further review the appropriateness of content is easily problematized13.
Bias for best. Bias for best means that, “tests should be designed so as to elicit the best
possible performance from test-takers” (Bailey, 1998, p. 154). Similar to the preceding
principles, although IELTS purports to “bias for the best” this may not be the case14.
See Appendix H for Swain’s Principles elaborated per test module. Each cell presents what the IELTS purports to
do (marked by +), and or a concern, criticism, or recommendation (marked by -).
13
See Appendix H for Swain’s Principles: Concentrate on content.
14
See Appendix H for Swain’s Principles: Bias for best.
12
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
13
Work for washback. Swain’s last principle, work for washback, refers to how a test
influences, language instruction, and language learning. In Green’s (2007) words, washback is
“the effect of testing on teaching and learning” (p. 76). Accordingly, there are two different
argument strands evident in applied linguistics literature that advocates either negative or
positive washback15.
Reliability and Validity
Wesche and Swain’s frameworks16 are also useful in the discussion of the IELTS
reliability and validity. Test reliability is generally defined as “the extent to which the results
can be considered consistent or stable” (Brown, 2005, p. 175). In terms of the overall reliability
and Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) of the IELTS, reliability is quite high. Yet, high
reliability is inherently meaningless: “a test might be highly reliable, in the sense of producing
replicable measures, but completely irrelevant in terms of its content or predictive utility”
(UCLES, 2001, p. 15). Based on the data presented in the 2001 Guidelines for Testing and
Admissions Personnel, the Overall Reliability of the Academic module is reported at 0.94 and
the SEM at 0.36. (SEM should be interpreted according to final bandscore). What this indicates
is that, “for the Academic module, there is an approximately 68% probability that a candidates
result is accurate to within .36 of a band, and a 95% probability that it is within .72 of a band”
(UCLES, 2001, p. 16)
In terms of validity, IELTS’ own research carefully considers construct, content, and
criterion-related validity. As far as construct validity is concerned, ongoing research is
undertaken “to explore the processes and identify the strategies which underlie the performance
of candidates on IELTS tests, and which are specific to the constructs being tests by IELTS”
15
16
See Appendix H for arguments pertaining to negative and positive washback in each of the IELTS modules.
See Appendix H for arguments pertaining to validity and test construct according to Swain’s Principles
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
14
(UCLES, 2001, p. 13). Looking at content validity, IELTS purports to attach great importance to
selecting test content that “reflects an international dimension” (UCLES, 2001, p. 13).
Additionally, IELTS recognizes that “positive relationships found between language proficiency
measures and academic achievement tends to be relatively weak” (UCLES, 2001, p. 13).
Therefore, IELTS continuously conducts criterion-related validity research in attempt to
“demonstrate that test scores are systematically related to an outcome criterion or criteria”
(UCLES, 2001, p. 13).
Conclusion
Reviewing the Academic Modules of the IELTS has been an informative process,
especially when considering the impact of a high-stakes communicative test in terms of design
and overall value. What has become clear, is that from reviewing a test of this nature, Pandora ’s
Box has indeed been opened, in turn revealing the daunting nature of test development, test
analysis, and the testing industry. As well, this review revealed that two parallel argument
strands exist in literature pertaining to the IELTS. With this in mind, both arguments endorsing
the IELTS, and arguments which criticize the IELTS, are equally valuable. In consideration of
Swain and Wesche’s frameworks, this review process has been particularly interesting as it has
shed light on how innumerable interrelated variables must be considered when designing and
using such high-stakes assessment tools – for test creators, for test takers, and professional
educators alike.
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
15
References
Aryadoust, V. (2012). Differential Item Functioning in While-Listening Performance Tests: The
Case of the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) Listening Module.
The Intl. Journal of Listening, 26, 40-60.
Bailey, K. M. (1998). Learning about language assessment: Dilemmas, decisions and directions.
Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Brown, J. D. (2005). Testing in language programs: A comprehensive guide to English language
assessment (New ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall Regents.
Carey, M & Mannell, R. (2010). Does a rater’s familiarity with a candidate’s pronunciation
affect the rating in oral proficiency interviews?. Language Testing, 28(2), 201-219.
Coffin, C. (2004). Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: the role of
argument in IELTS tests. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3, 229-246.
Green, A. (2007). Washback to learning outcomes: a comparative study of IELTS preparation
and university pre-sessional language courses. Assessment in Education, 14, 75-97.
Hall, G. (2010). International English language testing: a critical response. ELT Journal, 64(3),
321-326)
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013a). IELTS Test Takers FAQs,
Retrieved October 3, 2013 from
http://www.ielts.org/test_takers_information/test_takers_faqs.aspx
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013b). IELTS Researchers – Band
descriptors, reporting, and interpretation, Retrieved October 3, 2013 from
http://www.ielts.org/researchers/score_processing_and_reporting.aspx
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
16
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013). IELTS Institutions, Retrieved
October 3, 2013 from http://www.ielts.org/institutions.aspx
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013). IELTS Institutions – Security
procedures, Retrieved October 3, 2013 from
http://www.ielts.org/institutions/security_and_integrity/security_procedures.aspx
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013e). Institutions – Band scores,
Retrieved October 3, 2013 from
http://www.ielts.org/institutions/test_format_and_results/ielts_band_scores.aspx
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013). IELTS Test Taker Information
– Test Sample, Retrieved October 3, 2013 from
http://www.ielts.org/test_takers_information/test_sample.aspx
McNamara, T. (2000). Language Testing (Oxford Introductions to Language Study Series)
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1984). Large-scale communicative language testing. In S. J. Savignon, & M. S.
Berns (Eds.), Initiatives in communicative language teaching. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate. (2001). Introduction to IETLS:
Guidelines for testing and admissions personnel. Cambridge, UK: UCLES.
Uysal, H. (2009). A critical review of the IETLS writing test. ELT Journal, 64/3, 314-320.
Wallace, C. (1997). IELTS: global implication of curriculum and materials design. ELT
Journal, 51/4, 370-373.
Weir, C., Hawkey, R., Green, A., Unaldi, A., Devi, S. (2009). The relationship between the
academic reading construct as measured by IELTS and the reading experiences of student
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
in their first year of study at a British university. IELTS Research Reports, Vol. 9.
Retrieved October 1, 2013 from: http://www.ielts.org/PDF/Vol9_Report3.pdf
Wesche, M. B. (1983). Communicative testing in a second language. The Modern Language
Journal, 67, 41-55.
17
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
18
Appendix A: Sample Listening Materials
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
19
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
20
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
21
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
22
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
23
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
24
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
25
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
26
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
27
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
28
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
29
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
30
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
31
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
32
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
33
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
34
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
35
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
36
Appendix B: Sample Reading Materials
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
37
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
38
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
39
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
40
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
41
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
42
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
43
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
44
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
45
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
46
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
47
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
48
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
49
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
50
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
51
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
52
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
53
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
54
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
55
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
56
Appendix C: Sample Writing Materials
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
57
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
58
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
59
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
60
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
61
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
62
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
63
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
64
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
65
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
66
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
67
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
68
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
69
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
70
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
71
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
72
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
73
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
74
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
75
Appendix D: Sample Speaking Materials
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
76
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
77
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
78
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
79
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
80
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
81
Appendix E: Bandscore Descriptors
Band 9: Expert user: has fully operational command of the language: appropriate, accurate and
fluent with complete understanding.
Band 8: Very good user: has fully operational command of the language with only occasional
unsystematic inaccuracies and inappropriacies. Misunderstandings may occur in unfamiliar
situations. Handles complex detailed argumentation well.
Band 7: Good user: has operational command of the language, though with occasional
inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings in some situations. Generally handles
complex language well and understands detailed reasoning.
Band 6: Competent user: has generally effective command of the language despite some
inaccuracies, inappropriacies and misunderstandings. Can use and understand fairly complex
language, particularly in familiar situations.
Band 5: Modest user: has partial command of the language, coping with overall meaning in
most situations, though is likely to make many mistakes. Should be able to handle basic
communication in own field.
Band 4: Limited user: basic competence is limited to familiar situations. Has frequent problems
in understanding and expression. Is not able to use complex language.
Band 3: Extremely limited user: conveys and understands only general meaning in very
familiar situations. Frequent breakdowns in communication occur.
Band 2: Intermittent user: no real communication is possible except for the most basic
information using isolated words or short formulae in familiar situations and to meet immediate
needs. Has great difficulty understanding spoken and written English.
Band 1: Non-user: essentially has no ability to use the language beyond possibly a few isolated
words.
Band 0: Did not attempt the test: No assessable information provided.
IELTS: International English Language Testing System. (2013e). Institutions – Band scores,
Retrieved October 3, 2013 from
http://www.ielts.org/institutions/test_format_and_results/ielts_band_scores.aspx
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
82
Appendix F: Band score associated with raw score
Listening and reading
“IELTS Listening and Reading papers contain 40 items and each correct item is awarded one
mark; the maximum raw score a candidate can achieve on a paper is 40. Band scores ranging
from Band 1 to Band 9 are awarded to candidates on the basis of their raw scores.
Although all IELTS test materials are pretested and trialed before being released as live tests,
there are inevitably minor differences in the difficulty level across tests. In order to equate
different test versions, the band score boundaries are set so that all candidates’ results relate to
the same scale of achievement. This means, for example, that the Band 6 boundary may be set at
a slightly different raw score across versions.
The tables below indicate the mean raw scores achieved by candidates at various levels in each
of the Listening, Academic Reading and General Training Reading tests and provide an
indication of the number of marks required to achieve a particular band score.”
http://www.ielts.org/researchers/score_processing_and_reporting.aspx
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
Appendix G: Table - Wesche’s Framework
83
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
84
Appendix H: Table - Swain’s
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
85
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
86
Appendix I: General
information
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
87
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
88
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
89
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
90
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
91
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
92
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
93
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
94
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
95
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
96
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
97
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
98
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
99
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
100
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
101
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
102
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
103
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
104
IELTS: A TEST REVIEW
105