English for Academic Purposes Programs: Key Trends Across Canadian Universities

Because of the large number of post-secondary English for academic purposes (EAP) programs and the varying ways they are structured, it can be difficult to identify how a particular program fits within the overall landscape of university education. To identify general trends across Canada, the webpages for 74 EAP programs at 50 public English-medium universities were examined for key information related to each program. Data analysis included descriptive statistics as well as graphical representation. The results pointed to typical EAP programs that are independent units that offer non-credit courses with some credit options, have international tuition fees around $9,000 per semester, provide approximately 22 hours of instruction per week, and generally require IELTS scores over 5.0 or TOEFL iBT scores over 59 for entry. These results provide an avenue of comparison and indicate the need for future research to better understand how EAP programming is conceptualized in the Canadian context.

Questioning in TOEFL iBT speaking test: a case of washback and construct underrepresentation

Admission in English-medium universities or institutions of higher education depends on the results obtained by candidates in large-scale proficiency tests including Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) internet-based test (iBT). The structure and administration procedure of the TOEFL iBT speaking test leaves no room for carrying out reciprocal interactions and, consequently, examining applicants’ questioning ability. This study highlights the significance of non-native students’ skills to ask oral English questions in academic contexts as experienced by non-native graduates from English-medium universities and in the view of Iranian TOEFL iBT instructors. Further, the washback of the absence of the skill in the TOEFL iBT test was investigated in speaking preparation classes. Twelve non-native graduates and nineteen Iranian TOEFL iBT instructors participated in the study. They were all interviewed about the significance of oral questioning. The instructors’ views were also sought about the consequences of the disregard of questioning in the test. To triangulate the data, two classes of the instructors were also observed. Classroom observations and interviews were analyzed through content analysis. The results indicated that the participants generally assumed questioning as indispensable in academic interactions. Despite their acknowledgment of its significance, as both the interviews and observations unveiled, the instructors, however, tended not to work on their students’ questioning because of the absence of the skill in the test, the students’ reluctance, limited preparation time, and dependence of their professional reputation on the test results rather than target situation performance. The study further discusses the implications of the findings for the test construct representation and preparation courses.

What scores from monologic speaking tests can(not) tell us about interactional competence

The overarching aim of the study is to explore the extent to which test takers’ performances on monologic speaking tasks provide information about their interactional competence. This is an important concern from a test use perspective, as stakeholders tend to consider test scores as providing comprehensive information about all aspects of L2 competence. One hundred and fifty test takers completed a TOEFL iBT speaking section consisting of six monologic tasks, measuring speaking proficiency, followed by a test of interactional competence with three monologues and three dialogues, measuring pragmalinguistic skills, the ability to recipient design extended discourse, and interactional management skills. Quantitative analyses showed a medium to high correlation between TOEFL iBT speaking scores and interactional scores of r = .76, though with a much lower correlation of r = .57 for the subsample most similar to a typical TOEFL population. There was a large amount of variation in interactional scores for test takers at the same TOEFL iBT speaking score level, and qualitative analyses demonstrated that test takers’ ability to recipient design their talk and format social actions appropriate to social roles and relationships was not well captured by speaking scores. We suggest potential improvements.