The South China Morning Post reports that residents of mainland China will no longer be permitted to take the paper-based IELTS in Hong Kong unless they can prove that they are legal residents of the city.  This mirrors recent IELTS policy changes in countries around the world which have also barred non-residents from accessing the paper-based test.

Interestingly, a British Council representative linked this change to fraud prevention. They are quoted as saying that “the analysis by the IELTS partners shows that there is a link between non-resident access to IELTS on paper and fraudulent test-day activity.”

And also that “By limiting the access to residents, much of this risk will be mitigated.”

They also noted that the change would “enhance the security of the test and… protect IELTS customers from becoming victims of fraud.”

This is the first time I’ve seen an IELTS official explicitly link the new policy to fraud prevention efforts. Unstated is what sort of fraudulent activity is occurring at administrations of the paper-based IELTS. The British Council’s most recent fraud report cited only 22 instances of exam misconduct across all administrations (paper and computer) worldwide in 2022/23.

Mildly interesting news, folks! This Thursday, the official IELTS Facebook and Instagram pages will be shuttered. All content will instead come from pages operated by each of the IELTS partners.

Here are the current follower counts of said pages:

  • IELTS Official Facebook: 5.5 million followers
  • IELTS IDP Facebook: 2.6 million followers
  • IELTS BC Facebook: 532 thousand followers

 

  • IELTS Official Instagram: 115 thousand followers
  • IELTS IDP Instagram: 135 thousand followers
  • IELTS BC Instagram: 339 thousand followers

 

The official IELTS LinkedIn account will remain active, I guess.

(source)

The Guardian has weighed in with an editorial suggesting that the UK government should “cherish and preserve” the British Council.  I imagine that they will soon step in to provide favorable terms for repayment of the British Council’s large debt.  They might even kick in more funding as well.  The Council does good work, and I’ve recently enjoyed learning about it via the “Our World, Connected” podcast (do check it out).  Soft power can be a valuable thing, and for very obvious reasons many populations still view western European governments with suspicion that they don’t have for, say, the government of Russia.  The British Council can help to remedy this.

But before funding is increased, CEO Scott McDonald should probably be queried about challenges related to language testing.  Even following its exit from the lucrative Indian market, revenue from the IELTS test remains a major part of how the BC funds its activities. This revenue is at risk: regulatory changes have wiped out most of the old IELTS monopolies and (more importantly) competing tests are increasingly attractive to both test takers and score users.  There is a very real chance that IELTS revenue will decline year after year.  IDP Education shareholders might have a few thoughts to share on this possibility.

So while the UK government can create stability in the short term with more funding and more favorable loan repayment terms, it is entirely possible that some future CEO will also appear, hat-in-hand, looking for a bailout.

What’s the plan, then?

A few months ago, the IELTS team received plaudits for stating that they are “cautiously curious” about AI in language testing.  And that they think AI “has a lot of potential.”  But among the plaudits there was some snark*, as Pearson has successfully been using AI in the PTE for 15 years.  And Duolingo has been doing so in the DET for a decade.  Some have suggested that the IELTS test is falling behind the times.  There was a bit more snark** late last year when the IELTS team made an “important announcement” about switching from pencils to ballpoint pens.

I spoke to a colleague with some experience in the industry a few weeks ago.  She said:  “Everyone is worried about Duolingo but do absolutely nothing about it. Not with product development, marketing, nothing.

The plan is unclear.

What’s worse is that some of the people responsible for handing out hundreds of millions of pounds of public money don’t even seem to know that tests like the DET even exist.  It is perhaps unfortunate that these issues weren’t explored in more depth when Scott McDonald appeared before the Foreign Affairs Committee last month.

*not from me!!

**a little bit from me

I was sent the actual testimony of British Council CEO Scott McDonald before the Foreign Affairs committee.  The situation over at the BC seems even worse than the Times article made it out to be.  Here are a few highlights:

  1. The British Council owes £200 million (from an original loan of £250 million) to the Foreign Office.  At the end of each year this loan is rolled over to the next year.  This is the reason for the regular delays in getting the British Council’s annual reports.  Regarding the delay, McDonald said:  “we cannot file our accounts until we have that rolled over, because without it we would be insolvent.”  This is the problem of the moment.

 

  1. A lot of interest is paid.  Noted McDonald:  “Based on the way that it is structured at the moment, it is a high interest rate. It is pretty onerous. We pay £14 million a year in interest. Every year when we roll it over, there are a couple of million in admin costs for rolling it over.”

 

  1. BC is seeking a 20-25 year repayment plan for the loan, beginning 2-4 years from now.

 

  1. There are plans to reduce costs by £250 million over the next five years. So far, headcount has been reduced by 17%, and the BC has pulled out of 18 countries.  All back-office functions have been outsourced.

 

  1. And BC’s IELTS operations in India have been sold. Regarding this sale:  “When we first took the loan, which was in the middle of covid, it was £250 million. The first thing we did was sell one of our really good businesses, the English assessment business in India, so we could pay back some of the money and show goodwill right away. We sold that business and paid back £50 million of the loan right away and brought it down to £200 million.

 

  1. Aside from the loan, the BC gets £165 million yearly from the British government to support its operations.  They are asking for an additional £75 million (plus support on the loan).

 

  1. Without the above bump-up (and loan support), the BC would likely pull out of 30-40 more countries.

 

  1. There is a weird dance between McDonald and the Chair about why and how the BC was 53 million in the red post-Covid (‘22-’23).

 

  1. Some of the BC art collection can be sold.  Some of the 40 buildings owned by the BC can also be sold.

 

  1. McDonald:  “There is lots of organised crime that tries to access those [IELTS] exams.”

A startling article this week in the Times laid bare the precarious financial state of the British Council. The organization is seeking to sell assets – including its famous art collection – to repay  £200 million of debt, most of which appears to be owed to the UK’s Foreign Office.

According to CEO Scott McDonald, the British Council faces “a constant threat of insolvency.”  The Times notes that in addition to the possible sale of its massive art collection, its leadership is “eyeing up which of the organisation’s foreign outposts can be put on the market.”

This all comes as one of the British Council’s biggest revenue generators – the IELTS test – faces stiff competition from new test makers at home and abroad.  Some observers have suggested that competing test makers are somewhat more nimble and responsive to changes in technology and consumer tastes than the venerable IELTS partnership. Test volumes have also been impacted by the loss of longstanding monopolies in major score receiving markets.

Note that in 2021 the British Council sold its Indian IELTS operations to IDP Education for a cool £130 million (cash) and exited the testing industry in that key market. One wonders if similar deals could be reached in other important sending markets.

The British Council is not alone as it struggles with its finances.  Several of the so-called legacy English testing companies have faced tough times in recent years.  IDP Education announced massive layoffs in June of last year, while ETS offered buyouts to virtually every employee in the United States around the same time.

The British Council’s next annual report is due to be published by the end of this month, but it could be delayed.

As a sort of followup to my earlier post about VAT being added to TOEFL fees in the EU, Here’s what it costs to take some of the most popular English tests in France (all prices USD):

  • IELTS Academic: $269 (inclusive of tax)
  • PTE Academic: $270 (inclusive of tax)
  • TOEFL: $324 (inclusive of tax)

Prices look similar across the EU.  The TOEFL is much more expensive in pretty much every EU country now that ETS has started collecting VAT (and passing the additional cost on to test takers).

I love my friends at ETS, but gee whiz the TOEFL is going to be a tough sell moving forward.  Is it providing some special sauce that makes it worth the added expense?  I’m not sure.

Anecdotally, it seems like ETS has begun 2025 with a really big promotional spend via Google Ads.  I’m seeing a ton of banners promoting the TOEFL as a test for destinations outside the USA.  TOEFL is also the headline sponsor of the upcoming PIE Live event in March.  Setting aside the fact that the audience there is exactly who the TOEFL team doesn’t need to influence, that sponsorship must cost a pretty penny.  Why bother spending so much money on promoting a test when you’ve got corporate policies kneecapping your potential in one of the biggest sending markets?

Who knows, who knows.

I suppose it is also worth mentioning that there are a bunch of new-ish tests (Password, LanguageCert, Kaplan, etc) with an average price somewhere close to $200.  The DET costs $65.

Effective immediately, if you want to register for the IELTS paper test in a country you must be a resident of that country.  Exceptions are granted for individuals from countries where the IELTS is not offered, and those with refugee status. Per this notice from IDP India, exceptions may be granted for those in free-movement zones (for instance, residents of an EU country may be able to take the test in any EU member state).

The computer delivered IELTS is not impacted by this.  People can travel the globe to take that version of the test.

Some have speculated that this move is a response to the oft-rumored “IELTS Field Trip” wherein students from a certain country quickly pile into a test center where security of the paper-delivered test has been compromised.  If that is the case, perhaps it is time to retire the paper-delivered test altogether.

Below is a message that pops up when attempting to register for the test via the British Council.  Check the link above for additional details.

This article by Daniel Lam and Angela Gayton is the best thing I’ve read all year. It explores gaps in knowledge about what test scores mean and how they can and ought to be used.

The authors interviewed personnel at a number of universities and illuminating excerpts are shared. I’d like to paste all of the quotes here, but I’ll limit myself to just a few.

Said one program director:

“If you say 6 and then somebody says 6.5, what is the actual difference, other than [that] 6.5 sounds a bit better, or higher, or more proficient if you like? […] So yeah, to me, it’s a fairly heuristic kind of process. People just come up with a number that’s either traditional that they’ve experienced or heard of before. ‘Oh, if this programme has this number, then maybe our programme should have this number.’”

And one EAP coordinator:

“I just find that sometimes it’s not consistent. So sometimes an IELTS 5 for one student, that student does not have the same standard or level of English as another one with an IELTS 5. So there are discrepancies, and I don’t know where that comes from – whether it comes from the assessor who assessed them, or there’s something in the guidelines that allows this sort of discrepancy.”

And:

“Sometimes the language level is not too bad, but because there is nothing behind, like in the thought processes, […] the student doesn’t perform well. And sometimes I think departments may mistake it for language inadequacy, but I don’t think it always is.”

A program director noted:

“I do think someone with a good IELTS score that comes here is a good user of English. But they may not be a good user of the particular type of discourse on which they will be assessed, which is a completely different matter. And I think this expectation or understanding is not there.”

One interviewee “laments” how an IELTS score can be used to make up for a failed assessment in a pre-sessional EAP program.

I could go on! The authors note that some of the comments “reflect the complexity of disentangling general language proficiency from academic literacy skills, and point to the need for a more nuanced understanding of this relationship, as well as, again, what language test scores are (un)able to indicate.”

In light of the recent “File on Four” report, there has been much discourse about how some students lack the language skills needed to excel in their studies. Much has been said about possible cheating. The folks behind IELTS seem to think that acceptance of a wider range of tests is problematic. But the issue is obviously more nuanced. All test scores are valuable, but they have certain shared limitations. Perhaps in 2025, when test prep is more sophisticated than ever and cool down periods between tests have been largely eliminated, yet more attention should be paid to the limitations.

Scroll down to the “discussion” section for tips that university staff should keep in mind.

Speaking of the IELTS on paper, I read that starting February 22, all administrations in India will require the use of a black ball point pen. Pencils will no longer be used.

I wonder if research has been done into how this sort of change could impact scores. Some students surely appreciate the ability to erase sections of essays and make long-ish changes during the final proofreading stage.

Beginning March 29, all IELTS tests in Vietnam will be delivered via computer. There will be no more paper tests.

Vietnam is a large market for IELTS, as the test is widely used in the admissions process for domestic universities.

I’m curious is this is a one-off development, or if it hints at a coming trend. Many test takers really prefer paper tests, but obviously they have some drawbacks in terms of cost, marking speed and security.

Note that the speaking test will still be delivered face-to-face or via an online platform.

Does anyone know what’s up with IDP IELTS China?  Students seeking to book an IELTS test in China are still seeing the “Registration system maintenance in progress” error that has been displayed for several weeks.  And, as far as I can tell, test dates for 2025 have never been open for booking.  That means, I guess, that no one is currently taking the test through IDP in China;  their entry into the market appears to be paused for the time being.

Some have suggested that this could be due to regulatory hurdles.  If that is the case, I imagine that a plan-B exists, and we’ll hear about it sometime in 2025.  As has been reported by a few outlets, IDP recently canceled its lucrative agreement to collect royalties on administrations of the test done by the British Council.  I’m certain they wouldn’t have given up that source of income without a firm plan to permanently enter the market.

With that said, it is worth noting that the launch of IDP IELTS in China has been somewhat peculiar.  It happened without much fanfare. It was mentioned in the most recent shareholder’s call and I blogged about it at that time. The PIE News picked up the story a bit later, and that was about it.  Most Chinese students only learned about the development after the Chinese blogosphere reported on the PIE’s report.

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.