ielts
Filtering by topic ielts(6)Clear all filters
- PaperIELTS Partnership Research Reports
A concordance study of CELPIP General and IELTS General Training
A concordance analysis of the CELPIP General and IELTS General Training tests was conducted to evaluate score alignment between the two assessments.
- PaperIELTS Partnership Research Reports
Safeguarding equity, access and inclusion in IELTS
This paper examines strategies to ensure fairness and inclusivity in the IELTS test, addressing potential biases and barriers for diverse test-takers.
- PaperIELTS Partnership Research Reports
Aligning scores of language proficiency tests: A score concordance study between IELTS Academic and TOEFL iBT
This study establishes score concordance tables between IELTS Academic and TOEFL iBT, enabling direct comparison of proficiency levels across the two tests.
- PaperIELTS Partnership Research Reports
Comparing New TOEFL 2026 with Former TOEFL 2023 and IELTS
This paper compares the upcoming TOEFL 2026 test with its 2023 predecessor and the IELTS, highlighting key differences in structure and scoring.
- PaperLanguage Testing19 Jul 2026
Outcomes of One-Skill Retakes in a Four-Skills Proficiency Test: Evidence From Large-Scale Test Data
Hye-won Lee, Emma Bruce, Jan Langeslag, Reza Tasviri
The study analyzes over 20,000 test takers using IELTS One Skill Retake (OSR) and finds that average retake scores were higher than original scores, with overall band changes similar to short-interval full-test repeaters. Survey data from 578 test takers indicates factors like insufficient preparation, stress, and fatigue contributed to initial underperformance. The findings provide empirical evidence for interpreting one-skill retake scores and inform discussions on validity and equity in large-scale language testing.
Original abstract
A test taker may underperform for reasons not fully attributable to language proficiency, including psychological or contextual influences such as anxiety or illness. IELTS One Skill Retake (OSR) was launched in 2022, allowing test takers to retake, within 60 days, a single component in which their initial performance may have been affected by extenuating circumstances. This study examines outcomes associated with OSR by analysing test-taking patterns and score changes among over 20,000 OSR test takers from its launch through Spring 2024. It also reports survey findings from 578 OSR test takers on their experiences, including whether they achieved target scores and their perceived reasons for not achieving the desired score on the original full test. Across skills, average OSR component scores were higher than the corresponding scores on the original full test, and overall-band changes among OSR test takers were comparable to those observed among short-interval full-test repeaters (⩽60 days). Survey responses commonly cited factors such as insufficient preparation, stress and anxiety, and fatigue and lack of focus as perceived contributors to underperformance on the initial test. The findings contribute empirical evidence relevant to the interpretation and use of one-skill retake scores and to ongoing discussions of the validity and equity implications of retake policies in large-scale language testing.
- PaperLanguage Testing25 Jun 2026
Reflections on the Practical Implementation of Knoch and Fan’s (2024) Good Practice Principles for Score Concordance Studies
Spiros Papageorgiou, Tony Clark
Reviews the practical implementation of Knoch and Fan's (2024) good practice principles for score concordance studies, drawing on experience from a large-scale concordance study comparing IELTS Academic and TOEFL iBT scores. Emphasizes methodological rigor, transparency, construct comparability, and limitations of concordance tables for admissions decisions. Offers recommendations for fair score requirements regardless of test choice.
Original abstract
When different tests are used for the same purpose, score requirements should be comparable so that examinees cannot obtain an unfair advantage simply because of the test they chose. Drawing on our experience conducting a large-scale concordance study to allow for an empirical comparison of IELTS Academic and TOEFL iBT test scores, we review Knoch and Fan’s evaluative framework, explore methodological best practices and challenges, and offer future directions for score concordance research. We emphasize the importance of methodological rigor in collecting test-taker score data, transparency in analyzing such data to build score concordance tables, and a reasonable degree of construct comparability as a prerequisite for conducting a score concordance study, while also highlighting the limitations of concordance tables as standalone tools for admissions decisions. We note that some aspects of Knoch and Fan’s good practice principles are more straightforward to implement in practice than others. The good practice principles could be updated or adjusted after real-world application, which we describe with a view to furthering best practice in concordance research. We conclude this viewpoint with recommendations for decision-making that are based on fair score requirements, irrespective of which test the examinees chose.