investigating ielts exit score gains in higher...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Investigating IELTS exit score
gains in higher education
Kieran O’Loughlin
Sophie Arkoudis
The study
Study of international students’ language proficiency development over the course of higher education
A large faculty of Economics and Commerce
Commissioned by IELTS Australia.
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
2
Data collection (2006/7)
Institutional policy about English language
entry requirements
Staff interviews, disciplinary and TLU staff (6)
Pre and post official IELTS tests,
questionnaires and interviews with 30 UG
and 33 PG students from 11 countries
Theoretical Framing
Positioning theory
Rights and responsibilities within institutional
practices
Positioning and repositioning explores the
extent to which participants’ actions are
maintained and constrained by the
institutional practices of the university (Harré
et al, 2009).
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
3
Types of positioning
First order positioning
Self-positioning
Other positioning
Repositioning
University positioning of
students (2006)
Minimum English Language entry requirements
set for entry so that:
If met then the students positioned as essentially
ready to successfully complete their higher education
studies without further English language study.
If students encountered English language difficulties
then there were support mechanisms.
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
4
Staff positions
Three discipline specialist and three
academic support staff.
Other positioned ESL international
students as English learners still developing
their skills as opposed to “expert users” of
the language.
Other positioned students as responsible for
developing their English skills during their course,
both for study and future employment.
Staff positions
“… we certainly shouldn’t be thinking of ourselves as an English improvement service for international students.”
The disciplinary staff believed that:
students’ language development (both
academic and social) was primarily their own
responsibility.
the university provides adequate academic and
social support services for the students to access
if they are sufficiently motivated.
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
5
Staff positions
The academic support staff self positioned
themselves as much more responsible for
developing students’ language skills but that
disciplinary specialists did not really support their
efforts in this domain:
“…it’s really left up to the students to find out on
their own, no-one strongly encourages them from
people who they see as being the leaders in the
disciplinary teaching.”
IELTS test
Four separate tests in Listening, Reading,
Writing and Speaking. In the Academic Module Reading
and Writing have more academic focus.
Results reported for each skill and overall
on scale from 0-9.
Listening, Reading and Overall scores reported in
increments of 0.5.
Writing and Speaking in increments of 1.0 (now in
increments of 0.5).
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
6
Students: a) test scores
The greatest average improvement was in Listening and Reading, and the least average improvement was in Writing.
Improvements on Listening, Reading and Writing (but not Speaking) were significantly correlated.
Students with lower results in Listening, Reading and Writing tended to improve significantly more than students with higher results in those areas.
Undergraduate students improved more than postgraduate students.
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
7
Students: b) case studies
Selected six case studies to investigate in further detail the statistical findings:
1. UG with strong overall gain (“Charmaine”)
2. PG with strong overall gain (“Carlos”)
3. UG with no overall gain (“Daisy”)
4. PG with no overall gain (“Truc”)
5. Student with overall gain, in particular more improvement in S than LRW (“Dian”)
6. Student with overall gain, in particular more improvement in LRW than S (“Ollie”)
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
8
High Speaking
Improvement
Low Speaking
Improvement
Low LRW Improvement High LRW Improvement
Charmaine and Carlos
Daisy and Truc
Dian
Ollie
Charmaine - UG
L R W S Overall
Test 1 6.5 6.5 5.0 6.0 6.0
Test 2 8.0 7.5 7.0 8.0 7.5
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
9
Charmaine’s positioning
Self positioned as having stronger academic skills than social skills at the start of her course
Also self positioned as a learner of English
Exercised high level of agency
Repositioned as stronger in social than academic skills by the end of her course
Carlos - PG
L R W S Overall
Test 1 5.5 7.5 7.0 7.0 7.0
Test 2 8.0 7.5 8.0 8.0 8.0
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
10
Carlos’ positioning
Self positioned as developing both his social and academic language skills at the start of his course
Exercised high level of agency
Repositioned as developing speaking skills outside of university and LWR skills through University study during his course
Daisy - UG
L R W S Overall
Test 1 6.5 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.5
Test 2 7.5 7.0 5.0 6.0 6.5
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
11
Daisy’s positioning
Self positioned as a learner of both academic
and social English at the start of her studies
Agency limited by her personality- not a risk
taker and opportunities to improve her English
were not readily available to her
Repositioned as passive acquirer of English
Truc - PG
L R W S Overall
Test 1 6.5 7.0 7.0 6.0 6.5
Test 2 7.5 7.0 5.0 6.0 6.5
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
12
Truc’s positioning
Self positioned as having good ELP to cope
with her studies because of her Test 1 IELTS
results.
Also self positioned as a learner of social and
not academic language.
Repositioned as someone who used her
agency to seek social opportunities to develop
her ELP, but that these were limited and did not
lead to improvement.
Dian - PG
L R W S Overall
Test 1 8.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.5
Test 2 8.0 6.5 6.0 7.0 7.0
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
13
Dian’s positioning
Self positioned as having strong ELP to begin his university study
Strong agency in developing spoken language
Weaker agency for developing academic language
Repositioned as having weak academic skills and strong social skills
Ollie - PG
L R W S Overall
Test 1 6.5 6.5 6.0 7.0 6.5
Test 2 9.0 7.5 7.0 7.0 7.5
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
14
Ollie’s positioning
Self positioned as an academic language
learner at the start
Exercised strong agency in seeking assistance
from the teaching and learning unit
Limited agency for developing social language
Maintained positioning as an academic
language learner
Students’ overall positioning
All self positioned as language learners
But differences in the type of language
they chose to develop
Their ongoing positions were shaped by
both their choices, their agency and their
opportunities within and outside the
university
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com
15
Conclusions
The University other positions ESL international students as essentially ready to undertake tertiary studies
Unlike the University, staff and international students position all students as English language learners.
But there is little agreement about whose responsibility it is to develop their proficiency.
This illustrate the stalemate around comprehensive action on English development in higher education.
The students’ narratives demonstrate that ELP development is not predictable or linear
Students agency and opportunities for them to develop are variable
Conclusions
ELP development should be more closely aligned with curriculum teaching and learning
There appears to be a close connection between academic and social language development, which only the students appear to recognise
University needs to foster both curricula and co-curricula activities
Demonstrating improvement is important for employment and communication in the globalised world
Australian International Education Conference 2009 www.aiec.idp.com