International English Proficiency Tests - How Reliable Are They?

 By Dr Hazman Shah Abdullah*

The Problem

The excerpts from an online news channel raise suspicions of mischief in language testing. There are also an increasing number of reports emerging from Malaysian institutions (also from those in the UK and Australia) that foreign students are turning with the required scores in recognised international English proficiency tests but in effect are unable to even hold a basic conversation in English. How would they follow lessons, read, think, communicate and write in English? 

What options do institutions have?

What should a responsible institution do?  Make these students take another internal test to ascertain for themselves the actual proficiency, or have these students take another international English test like MUET at the institution’s cost? This may be an option provided the terms of admission include a clause allowing this. Otherwise, the agent and the students might cry foul. What if the internal test reveals that there is a clear and worrisome difference in proficiency raising issues with eligibility? Report to the international English test service concerned? I am told that the institution might want to do this carefully and privately in order to avoid a defamation suit. Report to MoHE, MQA, EMGS, and to the embassy of the nation where the students come from or where they have taken the tests?

What else can the institutions do? The institution could help the students by offering low or no-cost English classes to raise their proficiency to an acceptable level to enrol in the programme. This would require dealing with EMGS and Immigration for change or extension of student visa. For obvious reasons, many institutions would not look forward to this option. 

Will translators in the classroom be a solution?

But apparently, institutions inspired by the agents who recruited these students for the institution have come up with another option - hire translators who will translate the lectures to the appropriate language of the students.

Sounds like innovative problem solving, doesn’t it?

But is this an acceptable option? Does it not run counter to the terms of approval and accreditation which include, among other matters, the medium of instruction? Will the teachers be able to carry out their role as educators and evaluators with the translators intervening? Does this option by design lead to plagiarism allegations? Is this option sound, and in compliance with established standards and regulations? 

Is acquiescence by regulators on these issues a vote in the affirmative of the solutions introduced? 

*Dr Hazman Shah Abdullah was a Professor of Administrative Sciences at Universiti Teknologi MARA until his retirement in 2018.  During his tenure at the university, he also served as the Assistant Vice-Chancellor (Quality Assurance). Dr Hazman was the Deputy Chief Executive Officer (Quality Assurance) of Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) from 2015 until 2018 and continues to serve as a quality assurance expert for MQA.