The impact of IELTS

In  all  focus  groups  with  staff,  IELTS  (International  English  Language  Testing   System)  received  considerable  criticism  in  terms  of  their  reliability  in   predicting  the  student  linguistic  capabilities  when  they  join  courses.  In  the   words  of  one  of  the  main  subject  lecturers:  “It’s  like  any  test,  isn’t  it?  They   cram  all  that  information  into  one  exam.  Surely,  it’s  not  going  to  be  

representative  of  all  the  skills  students  should  have  when  they  enter   university!”  (focus  group  3b).  

As  Edwards  and  Ran  (2006)  suggest,  teachers  need  to  understand  that  IELTS   scores  are  an  imperfect  measure  of  a  student’s  ability  to  cope  with  the  

demands  of  university  level  courses.  It  can  be  further  argued  that,  while  not   neglecting  academic  literacies  or  students’  IELTS  overall  result  when  

admitting  them  into  university,  institutions  need  to  move  beyond  the  focus   on  assimilation  to  provide  additional  diagnostic  approaches  to  identify   students’  learning  needs.  Following  Benesh  (1993),  Scollon  (1994),  

Pennycock  (1994)  and  Kachru  (1999),  educators  should  adopt  a  more  open   and  self-­‐critical  approach  to  ‘foreign’  rhetorical  conventions.    

Sandra,  one  of  the  lecturers  in  EAP,  in  particular,  had  strong  views  on  the   inadequacy  of  the  system:  

It  is  a  formulaic  exam  with  very  specific  fixed  components  in  it.   They  do  not  really  reflect  the  things  students  are  asked  at   universities,  particularly  in  arts.  The  writing  component,  one   task  is  to  make  sense  of  data  presented  on  a  graph  –  it’s  purely   descriptive  and  the  other  task  is  asking  the  students  to  use  their   personal  experience.  It’s  not  in  any  sense  academic,  there’s  no   concept  of  research  built  in.  [Focus  Group  3b]  

There  was  a  very  broad  consensus,  then,  that  while  IELTS  courses  provide   students  with  techniques  to  meet  the  university  entrance  requirements,  they   do  not  accurately  reflect  the  student’s  linguistic  ability  and  thus  can  be   unhelpful:  

Students  do  struggle  with  reading  complex  texts  within  a   relatively  short  amount  of  time.  They  require  skimming  and   scanning  techniques  to  comprehend  them,  but  actually  the   intensive  IELTS  preparation  course  teaches  these  skills  quite   effectively.  By  the  end  of  the  course,  students  would  have  gone   through  so  many  of  these  tests  that  actually  getting  a  high  score   in  a  reading  component  is  not  as  tricky  as  students  develop   those  skimming  and  scanning  methods  without  truly  grasping   the  content  of  the  texts  as  there’s  no  time  for  it  really.  [Sandra,   Lecturer  in  EAP,  Focus  Group  3b]  

These  findings  therefore  provide  support  for  the  literature,  which   suggests  that  institutions  should  not  rely  too  heavily  on  IELTS,  or  any   other  equivalent  form  of  assessment.  The  drive  to  recruit  students   should  not  remove  the  need  for  rigour  in  the  use  of  diagnostic  tests  of   language  ability,  and  should  be  informed  by  a  better  understanding  of   what  they  do,  and  do  not,  measure.  What  was  apparent  from  the   analysis  was  that  allowing  students  unable  to  achieve  the  standard  of   language  ability  required  for  admission  to  UK  courses,  was  increasing   the  burden  on  staff,  especially  if  adequate  additional  language  

support  was  not  in  place.  It  could  be  argued  that  closer  collaboration   between  recruitment  officers  and  lecturing  staff  would  be  mutually   beneficial,  increasing  understanding  of  each  others’  aims  and  needs,   and  allowing  a  consideration  of  the  student  journey  after  recruitment.      

Mauranen  and  Ranta  (2008)  argue  that  the  presence  of  a  large  number  of   international  students  studying  in  Anglophone  universities  “calls  for  a  better   understanding  of  the  way  English  is  used  in  the  new  circumstances  where  the   native  speaker  may  not  be  present,  and  where  Standard  [i.e.  native]  English   may  not  be  the  most  relevant  norm”  (p.  199).  It  would  appear  from  the  

comments  above  that  the  university  has  not  considered  the  implications  of  its   linguistically  diverse  student  population.    

7.5  Conclusion  

This  chapter  has  explored  the  impact  of  internationalisation  on  pedagogy  and   curriculum.  Issues  in  regards  to  teaching  and  learning,  the  

internationalisation  of  curriculum,  assessment  and  feedback,  coping  with   English  language  and  the  implications  of  IELTS  were  raised.  The  strategies   that  staff,  particularly  Learning  Development  Tutors  and  the  EAP  Lecturers,   enumerated  demonstrate  they  have  a  solid  knowledge  of  how  to  improve   pedagogy  and  curriculum  in  response  to  international  students’  learning   needs.  Their  approaches  enhance  the  experience  of  both,  staff  and  

international  students,  and,  ultimately  provide  positive  learning  

environments  for  all  students  in  the  HE  system.  However,  these  examples  of   good  practice  are  not  reported  as  a  norm  across  the  whole  university.  By   addressing  each  if  the  areas  outlined  above,  progress  should  be  made  

towards  ‘normalisation’  of  internationalisation  of  pedagogy  and  curriculum,   “turning  the  ad  hoc  and  uneven  efforts  of  a  few  enthusiasts  into  the  normal   expectations  and  requirements  of  the  organisation”  (Webb,  2005,  117).  The   ‘culture-­‐change’  in  regards  to  internationalisation  of  pedagogy  and  

curriculum  has  to  be  creatively  utilised  by  the  imagination  and  agency  of   those  who  comprise  the  university.  Internationalisation  of  pedagogy  and   curriculum  should  be  then  perceived  as  a  dynamic  process  which,  much  like   the  process  of  internationalisation  itself,  affords  staff  and  students  the   opportunity  to  own  the  process  of  their  own  learning  and  knowledge   production  (Webb,  2005,  117).    

Chapter  8  

Discussion  and  Conclusion  

8.1  Introduction  

This  thesis  explored  the  complexities  of  international  education  with  the  aim   to  raise  the  awareness  of  its  benefit  for  all  students  and  staff.  The  

participants’  personal  journeys,  involving  both  challenges  and  coping  

strategies,  illustrate  how  they  negotiate  the  new  intercultural  field  and  shape   their  future  development.  The  present  chapter  draws  the  thesis  to  a  close  by   providing  a  summary  of  the  findings  organised  in  terms  of  the  research   questions  raised  in  the  introductory  chapter;  it  also  considers  matters  such   as  the  limitations  of  the  research,  potential  areas  for  future  inquiry  and   recommendations  for  policy  makers.    

8.2  Research  questions  

This  thesis,  then,  explored  a  case  study  of  the  transformative  intercultural   experiences  of  postgraduate  international  students  and  staff  dealing  with   international  education  at  one  UK  university  (University  B,  see  page  77).  It   attempted  to  address  the  following  questions:  

• How  has  the  university  addressed  the  changing  landscape  of  HE  in   regards  to  internationalisation?  

• What  are  the  views/attitudes  of  international  students  and  staff  on   the  university’s  approach  to  internationalisation?  

• To  what  extent  do  current  pedagogy  and  curriculum  accommodate   international  student  needs?  

8.2.1  How  has  the  university  addressed  the  changing  landscape  of  HE  in   regards  to  internationalisation?  

The  findings  reported  in  chapter  five  indicate  that  even  though  the  university   has  adopted  an  internationalisation  strategy  implicitly  embedded  in  the