Here’s an article about how the Duolingo English Test scores pronunciation. It’s a challenging read.
Update: An easier-to-grasp summary is available on the DET blog.
Month: July 2025
I read Christopher Schaberg’s “The Textual Life of Airports.” If you like academic writing and you also like airports, this is the book for you. In the first of his three books about airports, Loyola University professor Shaberg explores how they have been depicted in literature and popular culture over the years. This is a curious topic – and not for everyone – but the book has attracted a lot of admirers.
I also read “Challenges and Innovations in Speaking Assessment” by Larry David and John M. Norris of ETS. This one is perfect if you are obsessed with standardized English tests, or obsessed with the history of ETS. Or both. I enjoyed reading about ETS’s early forays into speaking assessment for clients like the Peace Corps and the province of New Brunswick. There is also some good stuff about the “Test of Spoken English” which existed alongside the original TOEFL, which didn’t include any speaking questions. And, of course, I was happy to learn more about the ETS “SpeechRater” AI and how they handle templated responses. Less interesting were articles about more recent research at ETS. It’s always sad to read that sort of stuff knowing that it will never find its way into an actual product. You know, in many ways the story of modern day ETS is a story of research and innovations that don’t ever get used for any real purposes.
I read a report today from a test taker who has alleged that the proctor of her at-home test used her personal information to find her Instagram account. He then, allegedly, sent inappropriate DMs. This sort of allegation is more common than you might think.
I’ve never liked live human proctoring, but I have begrudgingly tolerated it. In cases where it absolutely must be maintained I’ve advocated for an in-house system. One of the many benefits of this approach is that it gives test makers more control over who can access the personal information of test takers.
That said, if your formula for “in-house” is (proprietary tech) + (a whole bunch of dudes brought in by an outsourcing company) you might as well just stick with one of the big proctoring firms. They’ll probably do a better job.
In any case, the days of live proctoring (in-house or otherwise) are likely numbered. It seems obvious to me that asynchronous proctoring (AI-based security during the test combined with a human review after the test) is the future of at-home testing. This is Duolingo’s current approach. ITEP uses it too. It appears that Pearson will follow suit when they launch their new “Pearson English Express” Test later this year. I assume that many other test makers are currently trying to figure out how to implement their own async systems. A decade from now, I don’t think any at-home English tests will utilize live proctors.
How much security is being provided by someone who is simultaneously watching a dozen tests? Could the same level of security be provided by someone who checks after the test?
Some test makers might protest that their customers prefer to have help with the check-in process. That may be true if your check-in process is clunky with cumbersome elements. But those elements can be ironed out of the process.
I’ve taken quite a lot of at-home tests over the years. I’m always happy when I can take a test without a live proctor, as the process is much more comfortable that doing so with a proctor. Indeed, I took the ITEP today and the process was pure bliss.
Test makers who eat their own dogfood and, uh, other people’s dogfood know this already.
The incident I mentioned above is bad enough, but a few other stories I’ve heard over the past few years come to mind. Like:
- Proctors insisting that test takers click the “cancel test” button after they have finished the test, causing the results to be cancelled.
- Proctors working from public transit.
- Proctors extending a room scan to the hallways outside of a test taker’s flat. And even insisting on a peek inside their building’s elevator.
- Proctors mistakenly allowing rules to be broken, resulting in score cancellations.
- Proctors forgetting to turn their microphones off. To hilarious effect.
I could continue, but I think you get my point.
I read that the Oxford Test of English Advanced is now accepted at University College London. That’s quite an accomplishment for the team behind the test, as UCL does not currently accept scores from other new (and non-SELT) products like DET, Password, Kaplan or Oxford ELLT.
Based on my research from April, the Oxford test is now accepted at four of the top 20 mainstream universities in the UK with the most undergraduate international students.
Nice article this month in Language Testing Journal about the creation of an in-house EAP placement test at the University of Iowa which utilizes integrated assessment. It notes that this was necessitated in part due to dissatisfaction with an earlier placement test that focused only on isolated skills. The article cites some ETS research about the improved predictive validity of integrated assessment.
The Iowa test is quite a beefy affair: the test taker consumes two 900-word articles and a 10-minute lecture on a singular topic, answers questions about them, and finally produces a piece of writing that draws on all three sources. That is all followed by a live conversation on an unrelated topic.
I wonder if we might see more of this in American schools over the medium and long terms.
Many people feel that responses to integrated tasks based on academic material hint at a student’s ability to do academic work and achieve desired outcomes. That seems to be the opinion of the authors of this article. Indeed, the University of Iowa waives the placement test requirement for students achieving over 100 on the TOEFL iBT… and seemingly never does so for students who get admitted with Duolingo scores.
The inclusion of such tasks on the TOEFL starting in 2005 is a big part of why it is now such a dominant assessment product in the USA. Note that marketing materials produced by ETS as recently as last year reference this feature as the number one reason why TOEFL is the most accepted English-language assessment in the world.
But these tasks will all be removed from the TOEFL in January. At that point, score users who have bought into the idea that integrated tasks which utilize lengthy academic sources have some extra-special predictive validity may desire in-house testing solutions to supplement scores used for admissions and better provide the support (EAP and otherwise) that students may need to thrive at their institutions.
Interestingly, the third-party placement test solutions I’m familiar with (College Board’s “Accuplacer ESL,” Michigan Assessment’s “Michigan EPT” and ETS’s own “TOEFL ITP”) are not particularly fantastic. They test isolated skills, mostly in a multiple choice format. I’m not sure score users would find them any more useful than the tests they are already using for admission.
Maybe this represents a possible revenue stream for ETS. Remember that the existing TOEFL ITP mostly consists of recycled test forms from the old PBT format that was phased out between 2005 and 2017. Perhaps in 2026 the ITP product could be rebooted to focus on test forms from the current IBT product. That could make it a more attractive option for score users who believe in the predictive validity of integrated assessments based on academic material.
As predicted in this space, both LANGUAGECERT and Michigan Language Assessment have announced that their tests have been approved by the Australian Department of Home Affairs. They will be added to the list of tests that can be used to prove one’s fluency in English when applying for a visa.
Still waiting for something from the team at CELPIP. Also waiting for the Department to announce specific score requirements.
Mildly interesting that Cambridge Press and Assessment is seeking a “Senior Business Change Lead” who will “define and deliver the business change strategy for IELTS across Cambridge English.”
They’ve already changed the colour of the IELTS practice test books, so it isn’t about that. It’s probably bigger.
Remember that just about twelve months ago, ETS started looking for someone to “drive meaningful business outcomes for the next generation English Language Learning products (Next Gen TOEFL).” And now we are getting a whole new TOEFL.
As far as I can tell, IELTS on paper has been eliminated in the following markets, per announcements from the IELTS team:
- Sri Lanka
- Pakistan
- Vietnam
- Malaysia
- Nigeria
Additionally, it is temporarily suspended in Uzbekistan, following an official announcement.
IELTS on paper for UKVI has been eliminated in a few other countries.
In all countries, the paper version is now limited to individuals with legal residence.
When I shared this list elsewhere, some readers mentioned that they have had trouble finding IELTS on paper test dates in Iran, Brazil and Argentina, though no official announcements have been made in those countries.
So one dude on Reddit claims to have achieved a perfect band score of 9.0 in the writing section of the IELTS academic test. Interestingly, this achievement unlocked the following band descriptor, which according to Google has only appeared once before online… in a Vietnamese Facebook group. Here it is:
Test takers at this band can typically fully address all parts of the questions. Their own point of view and ideas are relevant, fully developed and well supported. The writing is coherent and cohesive without necessarily any obvious linking words. They can skillfully manage paragraphing. They use a wide range of vocabulary in a very natural and sophisticated way, with only rare, minor mistakes. They can use a wide range of sentence types with full flexibility and accuracy. Only rare, minor errors occur in grammar.
This test taker latched on to “without necessarily any obvious linking words.” So maybe that’s the trick to getting a high score. Many teachers and online guides emphasize the use of transitional words and phrases. Perhaps that is not a good approach for people who desire a perfect score.
Update from some weeks later: One of the oft-mentioned bits of “negative washback” from the TOEFL and IELTS tests is the fact that they train young writers to overuse transitional words and phrases. I work with a whole lot of first year students who are trying to figure out academic writing and find their own voice. Part of that work involves teaching them to jettison at least some of those phrases (as a result, therefore, consequently, etc) from their writing and instead make use of the given-before-new principle. It can sometimes be pretty obvious which of my students cranked out two hundred TOEFL or IELTS essays before freshman year.
For for thought, anyway.
I am honored and amused to be named by The PIE as one of the “50 Voices of 2025.”
Here’s the citation:
“Michael Goodine is a writer and commentator on English language testing who has generated a cult following on social media, live chats and subscribers. Drawing from personal experience as an English teacher in China, Korea and South America, he critiques industry practices while offering insights into test preparation, policy, and learner advocacy.”
I believe I am the only honoree described as having a “cult following.” I’ll take it!
You can download the full list.
Official guides for the revised TOEFL have been adjusted slightly. They originally noted that the reading and listening sections will take “about 18 to 27 minutes” to complete. They now indicate that each section will take “about 27 minutes.”
Perhaps someone flinched at the suggestion that the TOEFL iBT will turn into a 65 minute test.
The PIE has published an article on the ongoing TOEIC cheating scandal in Japan, placing it in the context of what’s going on in testing at large. I was quoted a few times. As regards this topic, I think a few things are worth mentioning:
- Some traditional test makers insist that in-person testing is more secure than remote testing. That may be true. But if those test makers desire to influence the choices of score users, it is a claim which needs to be supported with evidence that goes beyond vagaries about over reliance on technology. In-person testing is fantastic, but it hasn’t exactly been covered in glory over the past 30 years.
- An enterprising journalist should look into what’s happening with the paper-based IELTS. All of the policy changes and service suspensions of the past couple years suggest that something is up. Maybe that relates to test security. I can’t be the one who looks into it, because I only pretend to be a journalist.
Note that the current scandal in Japan involves 800+ people who cheated on an in-person test over a period of several years.
Just a reminder that this coming Wednesday I’ll host the third English Test “Office Hours” chat on Zoom. Once again we’ll discuss the upcoming changes to the TOEFL iBT test. The nice part is that this time we’ll have actual test forms to look at! As always this is a meeting (not a webinar). There will be no slides and it won’t be recorded. Everyone can speak their minds.
Click here to register. Consider making a reminder on your own calendar app as Zoom doesn’t allow me to send reminders for meetings.
The goal for these chats has always been to create some much-needed connections and camaraderie in the test prep sector. But, of course, everyone is welcome to attend. We’ve had people from admissions and from test companies participate in earlier chats. And plenty of test takers, too. Overall, I think about 75 people showed up for last month’s chat.
This session was blasted out on Chinese social media, and right now about ⅓ of the registrants are from that country. I’m really happy about that, as test prep folks from China and “rest of world” don’t often mingle.
I think this will be the last TOEFL-themed session for the time being. In August I’ll do my best to drum up interest in a chat about industry changes in a more general sense.