Why aviation English testing is in such a poor state
Post 7: Lack of accountability
Why is language testing for the ICAO LPRs in such a poor state? One reason is a complete lack of accountability in aviation language testing. This from EASA and ICAO:
- "The assessment documentation should include at least … documentation demonstrating the assessment validity ... and reliability"1.
- "Test service providers should supply documented evidence of the validity and reliability of their testing methods"2.
This, from experts in language testing:
- "The need to estimate and report information about reliability and measurement error … is explicitly stated in the professional standards for language testers. [It] is not only a matter of good testing practice; it is also a professional responsibility"3.
- "The issue of accountability is important, and we would argue that certain minimum information ought to be made publicly available"4.
On scanning the websites of the dozens of aviation English test service providers in the marketplace, none offers any meaningful evidence for the validity and reliability of their instrument.
Until we have accountability in aviation language testing, pilots and controllers will continue to take poorly-constructed language tests that fail to address aeronautical radiotelephony communication.
1 EASA (2016) Annex 1 - Part FCL (FCL.055)
2 ICAO (2010) Manual on the implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements (2nd ed.) Doc 9835 AN/453
3 Alderson, J.C., Clapham, C. & Wall, D. (1995) Language Test Construction and Evaluation (CUP)
4 Bachman, L. (2004) Statistical Analyses for Language Testers (CUP)
Download this collection of blog posts here:
