I just learned that the TOEFL iBT Paper Edition was quietly discontinued in January.

The Paper Edition launched in December of 2021 in select cities across four countries. Test-takers took the Reading, Listening and Writing sections on paper at a test center, and took the speaking section from home on a computer. It included unlimited score reports, which was a nice touch.

There was some demand in India, I think, for a paper option.

This test should not be confused with the TOEFL Paper Based Test, which was a totally different test (based on the 1995 revision of the original TOEFL) that was discontinued in 2017. Nor should it be be confused with the TOEFL Revised Paper Delivered Test, which was just like the TOEFL iBT test but without a speaking section. That was discontinued in 2021.

More layoffs are coming at the Educational Testing Service (ETS). According to a WARN notice published yesterday by the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, 62 employees will be let go in July of this year. This comes as ETS seeks to rebrand itself as a “global education and talent solutions” organization.  It also comes about one year to the day following the announcement of ETS’s partnership with the Carnegie Institution to “transform the educational pillars they built.”

Regular readers will note that in late 2023, ETS eliminated about six percent of its total workforce, or about 150 individuals.

I believe this is the sixth round of layoffs and departures at ETS since 2020.

I do not know if employees in other states will be impacted by layoffs at this time.

Someone contacted me once again to report that their TOEFL scores were cancelled (no refund) because they increased too much over the span of seven months.  This is what ETS refers to as “an extremely unusual difference between” two test dates.  Or perhaps “Inconsistent performance in your responses between” two test dates.

I wrote a very funny and sarcastic post about this (I even made a silly meme) but deleted it because I love all my friends at ETS very much and I don’t want to be insulting. But listen:

  1. One one hand, the marketing folks at ETS mention potential score increases all over social media to sell test registrations to repeaters.
  2. On the other hand, the product development folks have created all these wonderful new test prep products which are supposed to help people get higher scores. They enable students target the exact microfeatures that are costing them points on test day.
  3. On the third hand, the OTI folks still cancel scores if they change too much.

Do you see why my hair is falling out?  I don’t think the firm should give students the tools to achieve large improvements in their scores, but also penalize students for achieving large improvements.

Leave a comment below if you have gone through something similar.

According to Forbes, the ACT will be spun off into a for-profit company. That for-profit company will be majority owned by Nexus Capital Management, a private equity firm. ACT’s current CEO will serve as CEO of the new company.

The non-profit ACT organization will continue on as a sort of hub for research. Or something. Probably under a different name. It will retain a minority interest in the test.

The ACT was created by researchers at the University of Iowa in 1959, and the non-profit that administers it was created in 1966.  For an amusing account of how petiness from ETS and Henry Chauncey led to the creation of this test, check out Norbert Elliot’s biography of Chauncey, Henry Chauncey: An American Life.

This comes as a surprise, but it isn’t an entirely new idea. Regular readers will already know that in the 1990s ETS spun off a bunch of its tests into a for-profit subsidiary which was later sold to Thomson. And British Council recently sold its IELTS interests in India to the for-profit IDP.  ETS’s move helped save that firm from bankruptcy.  British Council’s move looks to have been a smart one, as the language testing industry is increasingly competitive.

We will probably see more of this in the future.

I posted the following on LinkedIn last week, and IELTS tutors piled in to my page to insist that it will never happen, and that people are proud to take the IELTS instead of some other test.  Look, I could be wrong.  But I must note that no TOEFL tutors came to say that.  TOEFL tutors already know what the Duolingo English Test has done to their business model.  And the smart TOEFL tutors are planning for when the NABP starts accepting the Duolingo Test.

A final observation re: market share.

In the relatively near future, the Duolingo English Test will likely be accepted by governments around the world for visas and study permits.  This change won’t happen in 2024 or 2025, but it will probably happen within the next five years. Certainly within the next decade. When this occurs, demand for the IELTS, PTE-A and TOEFL tests will decline precipitously.

Few people will opt for a $250 test when a $65 test is accepted by the same authorities and is just as respected (or more respected) by the universities they wish to apply to.

As I indicated earlier, I assume that work on the next-gen IELTS and TOEFL tests is already underway.  If it isn’t… now is the time to break the glass and get started on tests that can compete.  Remember that it takes quite a long time to develop a test – the DET was in development for more than six years before it went mainstream in 2020, and the TOEFL iBT was developed over about twelve years before it launched in 2005.

Now in open access from “Language Testing” is an excellent article about test score comparison tables by Ute Knoch and Jason Fan. It explores the concordance tables provided by the makers of the TOEFL, IELTS, PTE-A and C1 tests.

This is a wonderful area to explore in 2024 – most readers are probably aware that the topic of concordance tables has come up quite a lot in recent years as the English test market has become more competitive.

The article suggests that when it comes to creating score comparison tables, best practice principles are not always fulfilled. It notes:

“Our findings indicate that the information provided on the test provider websites about concordance tables is often vague or insufficient. Test users are not always provided with the research underpinning these concordance tables. When such research is provided, it tends not to fulfill the good practice principles and is usually presented in formats not easily accessible to non-specialist test users.”

And also:

“…the sample sizes are generally too small to provide robust score comparisons. Basic information is often not provided, such as concordance results for subsection scores (which are crucial for the requirements for Australian migration and other policy-makers), the number of observations at different score levels, and their standard errors. Test users are not usually informed about the potential limitations of using published concordance tables.”

But why? Well…

“At the moment, there is little motivation to invest in more robust concordance studies due to the absence of regulatory oversight and minimal demand for high-quality work from test users. It is also important to note that concordance tables are one site in which competition between test providers manifests, who may have a commercial interest in lowering their test scores to make it easier for applicants to achieve certain test score requirements.”

There is much more in the article. Do check it out.

Some anecdotal evidence of changes in language testing for university admissions.

Twice a year, first year international students (undergraduates) at Columbia University reach out to me for tutoring while they are preparing for Columbia’s placement test (the ALP Essay Test).  Basically, students whose first language is English take a test to determine if they’ll have to take language classes in addition to their normal courseload.  I help them get ready for that test.  I’ve worked with about twenty such students since 2022.

Of course, I take the opportunity to quiz them about the test scores they submitted when they applied to Columbia in the first place.

Here’s the thing. All but one of my students submitted Duolingo English Test scores when they applied to Columbia.  One student submitted IELTS scores.  None submitted TOEFL or PTE-A scores.

Pre-pandemic, I think, most of them would have submitted TOEFL scores.  A few would have submitted IELTS scores.  Things have changed a lot since then.  They may continue to change.

(PS:  None of them submitted SAT scores)

Here’s an example of some fairly effective marketing from Duolingo. 

 

The UCLA student in the video says of the Duolingo English Test:

“I didn’t have to travel halfway across the city to go find a test spot. I didn’t have to book a test spot. The website didn’t crash on me. And it was definitely more affordable. I didn’t have to buy really expensive test material. I didn’t have to pay a whole bank account for me to buy a spot for me to take the test. I thought it was just one of those things that also had results that came really quickly and that was also super great so I think for me the DET was just this amalgamation of the best of everything that could happen for test taking for me.”

In thirty seconds the video hits on most of the things test-takers care about nowadays:

“I didn’t have to pay a whole bank account.”

Fees for taking so-called “legacy tests” have increased dramatically in the past few years.  Test-takers in some countries faced price hikes TWICE in 2023.  The decline of most currencies against the USD makes things more challenging. In conversation, some executives at testing firms have expressed skepticism that price is a factor when students pick an English test.  But it is.

“It was definitely more affordable. I didn’t have to buy really expensive test material.”

Speaking of affordability, many students in 2024 really don’t want to invest heavily in test prep and there is a perception that legacy tests require test-takers to spend quite a lot of money in order to get a score that matches their actual aptitude with the language. Test makers may be reinforcing this belief each time they unveil a new suite of costly preparation products.  This has been a through line in standardized testing since before I was born and with old monopolies dissolving it is now an issue in language testing.

“The website didn’t crash on me.”

Many test-takers really, really, really want to test at home. That said, some of them fear that at-home testing from legacy test providers is clunky and prone to technical problems. They also worry that if a failure occurs they will be on the hook financially for the failure.

I haven’t even mentioned the elimination of travel time or quick test results.

Anyway, that line at the end – “the amalgamation of the best of everything” – is marketing done well. Really really well.

Again, I want to emphasize that I love the legacy tests.  These posts are just an attempt to explain changes in the market that have occurred over the past four years.

I underwent surgery this month, so my reading slowed a bit.  But I did check out a few things.

First, I continued my read-along with the wonderful Norton Library Podcast by reading Charlotte Bronte’s Jane Eyre.  This was a fun read (and a fun listen).  It tells the story of the young Jane Eyre as she receives an education and enters early adulthood. Some people think it is quite romantic.  I’m not so sure of that, but let me know what you think.  Anyhow, the book is more accessible than many of the works in the podcast, and I can wholeheartedly recommend it to someone who wants to hone their English skills by reading some classic English literature.  It isn’t a particularly good way to prepare for the TOEFL, but one can’t always be preparing for tests.  You can find a cheap copy of the book on Amazon.

Next, I read the November 2023 issue of “History Today.”  A few articles stood out:

  • The Flies, Fleas and Rotting Flesh of Medieval Monks.  Yes, the article is as gruesome as you might expect.  It turns out that in Medieval Europe it was a sign of one’s faith to purposely infect one’s self with fleas and body lice (and worse) to bring about a state of constant discomfort.  This one is quite a read.
  • Still on the topic of religion (happy Easter, by the way), Christianity’s Bloody History in Japan traces the rise and fall cycle of Christianity in Japan, starting with the voyages of St. Frances Xavier.  Fascinating stuff.

History Today remains just about the best source of TOEFL-level readings, both in terms of vocabulary and length.  I always get subscriptions when the publisher offers me a deal, but you can find plenty of stuff for free on their website.

That’s all for this month.  More in April.

 

British Council’s 2022-23 annual report is now available. I believe it covers the twelve months ending March 2023.

British Council delivered 1.8 million IELTS tests in this period, a 12 percent increase from the year ending March 2022. Compare that to IDP’s most recent annual report, which mentioned just a 1% increase in the volume of IELTS tests delivered (and, notably, a 5% decrease in testing revenue in India).

Remember that BC doesn’t do IELTS in India nowadays (they ceded that market after selling their interests there to IDP in 2021). It looks like ROW is a growth market for IELTS, while India is somewhat flat.

Now in preprint from Daniel Isbell and Nicholas Coney is an article examining how English Language Proficiency tests are used at 146 research-intensive universities in the USA.  It examines which tests are used for admissions, what cut scores are used (and they compare across tests), and how subscores are used in admissions decisions.

The authors learned that the TOEFL iBT, IELTS, Duolingo, and PTE-A tests are most widely accepted, and in that order.

A few fun bits:

  • The TOEFL iBT is accepted for unconditional undergraduate admission at 135 schools, the IELTS at 133 schools, the Duolingo at 110 schools and the PTE-A at 61 schools.  I suppose this will be a priority of the folks at Pearson in the years ahead.  Though the test has (I think) moved into the #2 spot worldwide in terms of test taker volume, they still have plenty of room for growth in this area.
  • For unconditional graduate general admissions, the numbers are a bit different. The TOEFL is accepted at 117 schools, the IELTS at 116, the DET at 62, and the PTE-A at 54.  Obviously both the Pearson and Duo folks may wish to prioritize this area.
  • I was very pleased to see that the TOEFL CBT, which ceased to exist in 2006 is still accepted for unconditional admission to 11 undergraduate programs and 10 graduate general programs.  The TOEFL PBT, which was discontinued in 2017, is even more popular.  I suppose ETS ought to prioritize communications with score users in the years ahead.
  • As I have noted in my “score requirement tracker” posts, Duolingo cut scores have not always kept pace with revisions to their score concordance tables.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. There is some really wonderful data here, so do check it out.

Note, of course, that the above figures may have changed since the time the data was gathered.