TOEFL-ibt:Business or Measuring Language Proficiency

[gideyam]

At the outset, I would like to extend my sincere appreciation to the TestMagic community who are sparing their time and energy to speak out issues that address problems regarding the TOEFL-IBT test. This is my first time to visit the TestMagic webpage but I found it a wonderful forum to share views and experiences and a means to ventilate our feelings and pressures. I guess the TestMagic community started this forum since long time and so I am lagging behind information but I hope you will allow me to ventilate my feelings and observations. I also believe this may generate new discussions from different perspectives and dimensions. To come to my point, I found the TOEF-IBT to be a hurdle. At times I say to myself that it seems as if it is designed as a way to deny foreign graduate pharmacists to practice their profession. At other times, I go out of my way to think and guess the ETC has turned itself to a pure business entity that generates income with a strategy of skim the cream. Of course, the NABP contributes a lot to make the business more lucrative by making its minimum requirements high, particularly on speaking, and looking for scores of each test separately, instead of looking for an aggregate figure. Having said these let me pinpoint some of my observations and feelings as to whether the new TOEFL-Ibt meets its objectives-measuring the language proficiency of the test takers.
1. Testing Site Standards: I wonder if ETS has minimum standards that a testing site needs to meet regarding distances among seats and layouts. My observation is that the test centers that I saw were very crowded and the distance between two seats was very close. Under these conditions, how does the ETS assume that one could gather his/her attention and concentration without being diverted and distracted with the noises and traffics movements? Sometimes the sitting arrangement itself also matters. In one centre, I had a problem of focusing the computer screen due to a sun light reflection coming through the window. I think ETS does not need any party to witness such problems. If they are really genuine and concerned on measuring the test takers language proficiency, they can make their own inspections and make the environment conducive for such tests.
2. Duration of the test: As you all know the test is 4 hours duration with ten minutes break in between. This might not be everybody’s problem but I personally found it very difficult to stay energetic with all my concentration and power of thinking through out test time. By the time I finish the reading and listening tests, I got exhausted and I could not gather my mind. I start thinking and rushing to finish the test, instead of staying tuned and focused. The bottom line is why ETS does not make the test flexible? I mean, why is not possible to break the test into two parts (part one reading and listening and the remaining as part two) and allow test takers take the test on different days? If this not possible, what is the problem if one wants, for instance, to start with the speaking test first and then goes to the other parts. Different institutions have different requirements. For example, NABP requires more scores on speaking while other may not. In this regard, one may want to do the speaking part while he/she is physiologically active and energetic.
3. Retaking the test: I do not see the logic behind why test takers are made to take the whole test again once they have passed, for example, the reading and listening part of the test, instead of taking the part (s) that they have failed to score the minimum point. It would reasonable to retake the whole test if the objective is to score an aggregate figure of all test parts. When it comes to meeting the NABP requirement, for example, what they are looking is a minimum score of each test. Therefore, I do not see the reason why one should take the whole test again. If one sees this from the point of view of measuring one’s language proficiency, I do not see any valid reason. To me it seems as if the objective is to either measure test takers energy or ability to stay concentrated during long hour tests or make them fail the test by making them tired, which in turn leads to making the business more and more lucrative.

4. Booking for the test: in some states, for example in Massachusetts, it is becoming harder and harder to get a site to take the test. One has to register as earlier as two to three months to take the test. So it is a must to travel to states like NY to take the test. One has to be out of work for at least two days, which is neither economical nor convenient.
I have a lot of things going on in mind but I prefer to stop here. If deemed necessary I may write sometime. I am pleased to get your views.
I wish everybody success in the coming year.
Happy holiday.
GAR.