Month: December 2024

HOELT Updates: Mostly For Work Visas?

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

Some fascinating updates on the HOELT test from Beth Kennedy at The PIE today.  She reports that the HOELT supplier will be chosen early next year, and the test will be in place by 2026.

Curiously, the article notes that:

“…the development of the HOELT was created with work visas in mind, rather than study visas.  And it is understood that taking a HOELT test will not be a mandated part of getting a study visa in the UK – in effect meaning that universities will still have the freedom to choose which tests they accept as proof of international students’ English language proficiency.”

I am struggling to predict exactly what such a system would entail.  If the HOELT is intended for work visas, will the SELT list be maintained and used for study visas? Or will the SELT list be eliminated… and replaced with nothing at all?

In the latter case, I suppose visa issuance would simply require that students meet whatever language requirements their chosen university has set (like in Canada). I know that option has always been available to some extent, but the existence of the SELT tends to push students (and schools) in a specific direction.

A third option, of course, is to eliminate the SELT list and replace it with some sort of regulation that doesn’t currently exist.

TOEFL Search Service Eliminated

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

The TOEFL Search Service was discontinued a few months ago.  That’s great.  Launched in 2012 with assistance from Hobsons, the TOEFL search service allowed interested universities to comb through the demographic data and score results of TOEFL test takers and then pay to access their contact information.  It was an opt-in thing, of course, but some people I spoke to over the years didn’t understand why they were getting so many calls and so many catalogs in their mailbox.  Towards the end, it seemed like the main user was Hult International Business School.

The official TOEFL app has also been discontinued.  That’s great too.

The official TOEFL blog has returned.  That is also great.  It could be used to make the test feel a bit more like a living and breathing thing.  There was a time when people in the ESL space would be bumping into fun TOEFL stuff around every corner in both the online and offline worlds.

TOEFL Score Report Doesn’t Include Picture

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

Quite a lot of reports on social media lately about TOEFL score reports without pictures.  That’s weird.  They are supposed to have pictures.  But apparently a few things are worth keeping in mind:

  • Apparently, your score is valid, even if you don’t have a picture.
  • Universities generally don’t care about the picture.
  • If you reach out to TOEFL customer support they might be able to locate the picture and add it to your test results. If not, you might be offered a free re-test.

Let me know if you’ve been affected by this.  I assume it mostly impacts people who take the test at home.

On Magical Thinking

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

Here’s a new blog post from Duolingo.  It expresses the same point I’ve been making here for a month, which is that due to recent regulatory changes in Canada students are now free to choose whatever English test they desire, as long as their target school accepts it.  No longer are they forced to choose from a small number of expensive tests.

Says the green owl:

“Students can use any English language proficiency test accepted for admission by the academic institution they’re applying to – we know because we asked IRCC and they confirmed that for us!”

And:

“At just $65 USD, the DET is much more cost-effective than other tests, which range from $300 to $400 USD. Plus, there are no travel costs to go to a test center or hidden fees for sending scores to multiple schools.”

Legacy tastemakers have expressed the idea that despite the changes students will continue to take their tests.  They suggest that students like their tests because they include items that closely resemble what students do on campus.  Sometimes they say that students like their tests because the time they spend preparing for them gets them ready for their studies.  Other times they say that their test is “the gold standard” or that it is “fit for purpose.”

This is magical thinking.

Students are practical and pragmatic.  Indeed, they are some of the most pragmatic and practical people on the planet. They will choose the most affordable and accessible test almost every single time.

As I’ve mentioned here before, this is a “break glass in case of emergency” situation for firms that compete with Duolingo. They ought to have a plan already.

I will take the MET (Michigan English Test) Tomorrow!

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

I’ve scheduled an appointment to take the Michigan English Test (MET) tomorrow.  I’ll take the at-home version.  I’ve wanted to take this test for ages, so I’m happy to finally find the time to do so.

The MET is the successor to the old MELAB tests, which some readers might remember. Michigan Language Assessment has been doing English language testing since the beginning of recorded human history.  Today their tests are developed in partnership with Cambridge University Press & Assessment.

Update:  you can now read my full report on the test.

A few pre-test notes are worth sharing:

  1. I will take the three hour, 4-skill version of the MET.  There is a 2-skill version which can only be taken at test centers.
  2. The at-home version costs between $151 and $205, depending on where it is taken from.  That’s a fairly competitive price.  In comparison, the at-home TOEFL test costs between $185 and $450.
  3. At-home proctoring is by Prometric.  Test center proctoring is done by Prometric and the MET network of authorized centers.
  4. The test is accepted at a decent number of schools.  The website lists 966 accepting institutions.  But you know how those things are – some schools are counted more than once.  It seems to have great coverage in Atlantic Canada.
  5. Healthcare licensure seems like an area of focus for the test.  That’s wonderful.
  6. Payment and registration is fairly straightforward.  That said, I’m not crazy about the two-step process wherein test takers first register and pay on the MET website, and then take a activation code over to the Prometric website to make an appointment.  I get why smaller tests prefer this approach… but it isn’t great.  Test takers really won’t know what test center/at-home slots are available until after they’ve paid. Heck, they might not even know the location of the test center.
  7. I contacted MET’s customer service for help and they were really professional and pleasant to deal with.  That’s rare in this industry.
  8. The cancellation/reschedule fee is $100 when done 5-29 days before the test.  Free when done 30+ days before.  Could be better.
  9. There is some (but not a ton) test prep on the MET website. There is a printed prep book from 2019 which I will read if I can track down a library copy.
  10. The University of King’s College started accepting MET scores in October.  I used to go there to look at the microfilms. I miss those days.

Will share a few more notes when I’m done.  Let me know if there is anything I might keep an eye out for.

IDP IELTS and the NEEA

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

I was quoted in this PIE News article by Polly Nash as saying that the arrangement between IDP and the NEEA in China is more seamless than what ETS and the British Council have.  That might be an understatement.

Test prep people who don’t work with students in China may not realize that Chinese test takers don’t register for tests directly with the test makers like they do in the rest of the world.  Instead, they are offloaded to NEEA websites.  That organization handles the registration and payment.

It is worth mentioning at this time that the NEEA is the National Education Examinations Authority, which is an agency under the purview of the Chinese Ministry of Education.  They also handle other foreign tests like the GRE, GMAT and CELPIP.

I will forever be curious as to why this arrangement exists. I assume that this was the only way that foreign tests were allowed to enter the lucrative Chinese market.  Surely, in 2024, the test makers would prefer to handle registration themselves.  I could be wrong.

To be honest, this arrangement doesn’t really seem to bother test takers in the country who I talk to.  They tell me that they are used to it.  Perhaps there are advantages.  Prices in China are set in RMB and are not hiked as often as in other markets.  And I’m sure they don’t get nearly as many payment errors as people in the rest of the world get.

That said, the arrangement means that things like UX depend on the best practices of the bureaucracy, and it limits upselling and other things that add value to test registration.

Needless to say, I’ll likely be forever curious about how IDP was able to dodge this requirement.  For what it’s worth, Pearson seems to have also dodged it with the PTE.

Update:  Registration for the IELTS via IDP has been halted since December of 2024.  Maybe they didn’t figure out how to deal with the NEEA.

TOEFL Express Scoring

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

It is now possible to get TOEFL scores in 24 hours. Test takers who pay a $99 $149 fee during registration can benefit from this “express scoring” option.  Results normally arrive in 4-8 days.  Right now, it seem to only be available for tests taken at a test center… not tests taken at home.

Update, from December 22:  I don’t see it anymore.  Maybe this service has been removed.

Update, from February 9: Express scoring is back.  It now costs $149.

Below is the promotional image I saw during the registration process today.

TOEFL Raters will be International

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

According to reports that rolled in last week, the Educational Testing Service (ETS) has begun training individuals from outside the USA to score TOEFL test taker responses and to serve as scoring leaders.

This seems to represent something of a shift as far as the TOEFL scoring process goes.  To date, responses have been scored solely by individuals physically located in the USA (and in possession of a degree from an American university).  It is unclear at this time which countries the new raters will be located in.

Update from May 2025:  It appears that all of the new raters and scoring leaders are based in India and employed by an outsourcing firm called Firstsource.

Update:  For a little more confirmation, head over to the ETS Glassdoor page.

File on Four

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

The latest episode of Radio 4’s “File on Four” is titled “The International Student Scandal.”  It’s about low levels of English fluency among international students and the impact that may be having on post-secondary education in the country.  It also attempts to explain why this is happening and (per the description) “hears from a whistleblower about the multi-million-pound recruitment industry that feeds students from abroad into universities here – all at a cost.”

There isn’t much in here about English testing beyond a vague reference to examiners potentially being bribed, but it does hint at what might be going through the minds of people advocating for replacing the SELT regime with the proposed HOELT.  I imagine there are many individuals who believe that with a more perfect test with better security they can solve language-related problems that have been observed in higher education without seriously challenging the overall status quo.

Bad UX in English Testing

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

Here are two images that have inspired me to write, again, about bad UX in English testing.  First up is a section of the monthly “Search Performance” that Google sends me.  It indicates that the top growing search query sending traffic to my site in November was “score not available TOEFL.”  The second is a Reddit post from a guy who is “a bit freaking out” because his TOEFL score is “not available.”

So where’s the bad UX?   Well…

When a test taker has just completed the at-home TOEFL and logs in to their account to check their scores, they’ll probably see a message like “status – checked in.”  That’s a bit weird, since they are no longer checked in.  But whatever.

A few days after that, when they log in the status will be updated to something like “Score Pending.”  This is useful.  “Pending” might not be the best verb for the audience at hand, but it makes sense.

A few days after that, when they log in, the status will have switched to “Score Not Available.”  This is when some test takers start to panic.  Little do they realize that this status is the normal interregnum state between “score pending” and the actual reporting of scores.

Good UX might involve eliminating all three statuses, and replacing them with something concise like “Scores will be available December 7, 2025.”  Then again, I’m just a guy on the Internet who went to a test optional university.  Maybe I’m missing something here.

A few additional notes:

  1. This has been the state of things since the introduction of the at-home TOEFL in early 2020.
  2. My three-year old blog post about this topic was viewed 1461 times in November.  Semi-related blog posts scooped up a few hundred additional views.  If my obscure WordPress blog attracted more than 1500 perplexed test takers in a single month, I shudder to imagine the time ETS spends on customer support contacts re: this issue.
  3. The Internet horde, which never fails to amuse, discovered long ago that if they right-click and use “inspect element” on a certain part of the “not available” box they can sometimes see what looks to be their scores in some sort of json structure before the official delivery from ETS.
  4. Another frequent question is “how do I download the PDF of my score report?!”. For that, test takers must wait an additional 24-48 hours after the scores are first reported. Only then does the download link appear in their account.

IDP IELTS Opens in China!

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

IDP IELTS is open for business in China!  Test takers can now register for and take the IELTS through IDP Education. The British Council no longer has a monopoly on IELTS testing in this country.  Apparently all the test spots between now and the end of the year sold out in a matter of days.  Remember how I mentioned that it is hard to book seats to take the IELTS (and TOEFL) in China?

A few notes, culled from the Chinese blogosphere:

  1. The fee is 2170 RMB, which is about $298 USD.  That’s the exact same price as taking the test through the British Council.
  2. Testing is currently available in 14 cities across 10 provinces.
  3. There is no interaction with the NEEA when it comes to registering for the test.
  4. IDP apparently offers students one free reschedule.  People like that a lot.
  5. Testing is done all in one day, for the most part.  People like that a lot as well.

The overall reaction seems extremely positive.  Tutoring center staff I’ve talked to report that they’ve already sent dozens of students to register for an IDP-administered IELTS.  Good for IDP. I think this is a big win for that firm. Just what they need after a challenging year (for the whole industry).

I haven’t been able to track down the name of the test center operator that IDP has partnered with.

Update:  IDP stopped offering IELTS in China at the end of 2024.  The latest news is here.

CELPIP: A Review

Posted on by TOEFL Resources

Language Testing  has just published a review of the CELPIP Test by Coral Yiwei Qin and Beverly Baker.

The CELPIP is mostly used for Canadian immigration and is owned by Prometric, an American company.  The review indicates that it can be taken at 97 test centers in Canada and about 43 in the rest of the world.

The review provides a detailed overview of the test’s content before appraising the content.  A few points stood out when I read the review:

  1. According to the authors, the test lacks assessment of interactional competence. They note:  “the purpose of CELPIP-General is to evaluate test takers’ English abilities in everyday situations, which inevitably encompasses interactional competence as a part of the target language use domain. Nevertheless, interactional competence is only captured in a limited way in CELPIP-General.”
  2. The authors feel that the test lacks content that can assess test takers at advanced levels.  They note that while the test assigns scores which correspond to CLB levels 10 and above, they “did not find sufficient evidence suggesting substantial content coverage at these advanced levels of performance.”  The authors note that this could be a political consideration, as IRCC desires that tests match CLB levels all the way to level 12.
  3. The authors note that much of the content “was distinctly Canadian in nature.”  Canadian situations are referenced, there is evidence of a Canadian accent, and the test includes lines like “That was good, eh?”

There is more in the review, both positive and negative.  Do check it out. It is in open access.