icao regional workshop on language proficiency requirements implementation; paris, france, 6-7...

ICAO Regional Workshop on Language Proficiency Requirements Implementation; Paris, France, 6-7 September 2006

1

Language proficiency evaluation(testing)

Selection and development of language tests in the aviation context

Dr Jeremy Mell

Head of Language Studies, ENAC, Toulouse, France

Member PRICE SG, ICAO

[email protected]


2

Options for assessing language proficiency for aviation

• informal observations– « line checks », « inspections »

– classroom assessments

• formal language tests

– direct/semi-direct/indirect

– simulated language use• most direct• integrative: performance samples are matched to rating scales

– paper and pencil OR screen and mouse tasks • most indirect• discrete items/skills: favour numerical scores• but « juggling with only one ball »….


3

Language tests

• Definition• structured events or procedures • to elicit performances as samples of test-taker ’s language skills • in a standardised way • enabling reliable inferences to be made concerning his/her level

of competence • and possibility of reproducing those skills at that level of

competence consistently over time– adapted from Carrol (1968) and Douglas (2000)


4

Language testing

• A well-developed domain of intellectual activity:– academic

• body of research, cross-disciplinary links, international associations,...

• codes of ethics, codes of practice

• institutions of excellence, « chapels », « gurus », feuds

– commercial• international testing service providers

• general, academic, business,…

• Attempts to link different rating scales/test results


5

Types of language tests

• entry

• placement

• diagnostic

• progress/achievement

• proficiency


6

Entry/placement tests

• Purposes– ab initio training:

• recruitment• form level groups

– recurrent training:• benchmarking a

population• form level groups

• Characteristics• items chosen to cover a

broad range of levels of general language

• formats reflect previous education

• scores tend to form a « bell curve »

• stakes– high (recruitment)– mid (benchmarking)


7

Diagnostic tests

• Purposes– identify specific

areas of skill/knowledge for improvement in subsequent training

– individualisation of training programmes

• Characteristics• each item chosen to

represent a single significant area of knowledge/skill

• overall score less important than analysis of right/wrong responses - focus on errors

• stakes: low


8

Progress/achievement tests

• Purposes– to measure

effectiveness of a phase of learning

– to allow access by learner to next phase of learning

• Characteristics– items chosen to closely

reflect content and methodology of preceding training phase

– scores will often be interpreted with regard to average or pre-established norm

– may refer to intermediate levels (3,5; 4,5;…)

– stakes: low to medium


9

Proficiency tests

• Purposes– to establish the

competence of candidate to exercise language skills in operational conditions

• Characteristics• items chosen to

resemble real-world tasks

• overall scores are holistic: YES/NO

• stakes: very high


10

Testing needs of aviation

• Ab initio populations– entry

• selection

• local education vs aviation training policies

– progress/achievement• intermediate training

objectives

• continuation/curtailment

– initial proficiency• licensing

• Qualified populations– placement/diagnostic

• benchmarking populations

• individual training needs

• acceptance by takers

– (progress/achievement)• degree and speed

– proficiency renewal• recurrent


11

Language test quality

• qualities of tests in general

– validity

– face validity

– reliability

– washback effect

– practicality

• conflicting qualities


12

Test design specifications (ICAO)

• “As of 5 March 2008, aeroplane and helicopter pilots, air traffic controllers and aeronautical station operators shall demonstrate the ability to speak and understand the language used for radiotelephony communications to the level specified in the language proficiency requirements in the Appendix.” (Annex 1, 1.2.9.4)– formal evaluation

• “An individual must demonstrate proficiency at level 4 in all categories in order to receive a level 4 score.” (Doc 9835, Manual on the Implementation of ICAO LPRs, 2.8.4)– profile evaluation


13

Test design teams

• Tasks– develop test

specifications– construct test– evaluate test– ensure ongoing test

maintenance

• Qualifications– operational expertise– language test

development expertise

– linguistic expertise– item writers


14

Test administration teams

• Tasks– ensure advance

access to test samples

– schedule test– manage pre-test

preparations– manage test

• Qualifications– knowledge of

administration guidelines

– interlocutor expertise• operational• linguistic

– rater expertise (min 2 raters)


15

Rater/interlocutor qualifications

• 3 basic qualifications– language level

– aviation background + familiarity with ICAO LPRs

– principles of language proficiency and language testing

• suitable candidates– aviation personnel

– language trainers

• L1 background– native speakers(NS)/non-native speakers (NNS)

– risk of familiarity with a given form of NNS spoken English


16

Institutional context• need for independent international oversight to ensure:

– validity of testing procedures used– comparability of testing procedures and outcomes

• testing outcomes are linked with personnel licensing – testing may not be in the sole hands of the ELT community– partnerships with CAA, service provider, airline,...

• system cannot tolerate a high failure rate– waste of expensive training investment– staffing levels must ensure continuity of service

• prior knowledge of test procedures for positive “washback” on training– trainee motivation and attitude, reassurance of candidates– development of appropriate training systems– BUT unsuitability of “cramming”, test item banks


17

A common test for ATC and pilots?

• pilots and controllers are partners in R/T communication• but they are set apart by:

– different interactive roles

– complementary passive/active competencies

– opportunity to use other job-related language uses to extend speech sample:

• controller: telephone co-ordinations, report to supervisor, ...• pilot: pre-flight, intra-cockpit, cabin announcements, ground staff, ….

• a possible solution?– common core test

– job-specific components


18

Need for testing services• time/space constraints

– dispersed locations (recurrent)– irregular schedules and limited

availability of test-takers (recurrent)

– availability of technologies– test/re-test

• test components– single event, integrative?– different item designs to test

separate skills?

• standardisation of results– extensive trialling– comparable conditions of test

administration– examiner training/auditing

• interlocutors

• raters

• test security– secure storage and transfer of

test materials– multiple parallel versions


19

Appropriate technologies• voice-only

– telephone, 2-way radio, language laboratories, training simulators

• input delivery– analogue players, computer screen (multimedia)

• performance storage and access– analogue recorders, computer sound files (rapid access)

• speech recognition• standardise perception of intelligibility, save rating costs

• BUT needs to filter all possible speech variations

• no real interaction

• « interactions » need to be human-human– initiate and maintain exchanges– deal with misunderstandings


20

Standardisation

• operationalisation of the rating scale– speech samples– « can do » statements

• rater training– initial– refresher

• rating protocols– paired rating– multiple rating


21

Assessment of level 6

• NOT a safety issue, but raises concerns about:

• resources ( no re-test)• NS/NNS distinctions

• Speakers may be:• mother-tongue• non-mother tongue

– intranational use

– non-intranational use

• Candidacy on basis of biographical criteria

• citizenship, educational background, residency, ...

• Protocols for assessment– admissible evidence

– assessor qualification

– appropriate documentation

• Subsequent checking and oversight must address:– adherence to standard

ICAO phraseologies

– ICAO LPRs for • intelligibility• appropriateness


22

Informal evaluations

• Within the initial or continuing training process, language trainers can identify 3 categories of trainee:

- well-below level 4

- approximately at level 4 (confirm by formal evaluation)

- comfortably above above level 4

• …thus enabling informed decisions to be made on• possible access to professional functions

• further training required

• benchmarking of populations


23

Formal tests for ICAO level 4

• Placement (entry)– must relate to ALL 6 skills in

ICAO scale– must measure distances above

and below level 4– may have diagnostic capability– tasks/topics/input materials

focus on general or job-related skills

– development requires some statistical validation

• Proficiency (exit)– must relate to ALL 6 skills in

ICAO scale– must characterise test-takers as

BELOW or AT levels 4, 5 or 6– tasks/topics/input material must

reflect radiotelephony language competencies (including standardized phraseology)

– development requires strong statistical validation (high stakes)


24

Detailed specifications (proficiency)

• provide a representative range of intelligible international accents as input for comprehension;

• provide a professionally relevant format for candidates to display comprehension;

• elicit an adequate continuous speech sample to test fluency/pronunciation;• provide a voice-only setting for “diadic” (2-person) interactions;• provide examples of routine and unexpected events in a work-related context;• allow the candidate to use basic grammatical structures creatively;• allow the candidate to demonstrate ability to paraphrase;• allow the candidate to change between rehearsed/formulaic speech and

spontaneous interaction;• simulate unexpected events to create opportunities for misunderstanding.

– EUROCONTROL/ENAC preliminary feasibility study 2004


25

Some existing specific tests

• Controllers– ab initio

• entry: EPT/FEAST(Eurocontrol)• progress: APRO (ENAC, F)• proficiency: PELA (Eurocontrol)

– recurrent• placement: TNP (DGAC, F)• proficiency: ELPAC (Eurocontrol)

– under development for 2007

• Pilots– ab initio

• proficiency: FCL 1.200 (DGAC, F)

• Other tests– TEA (Mayflower, UK)

– TELLCAP (Russia)

– TOEFA (Peru),

– TELPA (IAES, Korea)

– TELAP (CA Flight University,China)

– RELTA (RMIT, Australia)

– ….


26

TNP (DGAC, France)• developed by national language and subject-matter experts (controllers

and ATC management) as a placement/diagnostic tool

• 3 papers cover professional language content:• a written multiple choice test of language knowledge

• a tape-mediated written test of listening comprehension (RT messages)

• an individual oral interview using paper-mediated graphic and text input

• expresses results in terms of the ICAO level chart

• used since 1999 with qualified air traffic controllers:• benchmarking to establish national training needs

• formulating periodic individualised language development and maintenance programmes in order to meet national qualification renewal requirements

• NOT a proficiency test• lacks robust validation

icao regional workshop on language proficiency requirements implementation; paris, france, 6-7...

Documents

simulated language

icao regional workshop

development of language

proficiency tests purposes

general language formats

taker s language skills

high slide

low slide