150 likes | 281 Views
Testing Air Traffic Controllers for language proficiency. Adrian Enright EUROCONTROL. 1998 - 2010. ICAO Assembly 32 nd Session Sept. 1998 PRICE study Group 2000 – 2006 SARPs adopted by ICAO Council March 2003 ICAO Assembly resolution A36-11 (Oct 2006) extends deadline to March 5 th 2011
E N D
Testing Air Traffic Controllers for language proficiency Adrian Enright EUROCONTROL
1998 - 2010 • ICAO Assembly 32nd Session Sept. 1998 • PRICE study Group 2000 – 2006 • SARPs adopted by ICAO Council March 2003 • ICAO Assembly resolution A36-11 (Oct 2006) extends deadline to March 5th 2011 • March 2010: how much further to go? • Only 17/56 States indicate compliance …
ICAO Support • Action Plan for Implementation, regularly updated • Checklist for regulators / service providers • LPRI workshops – 7th since Sept. 2006 • Language samples • Doc 9835, Circular 318
Basics of test design • Assess speaking and listening proficiency • ICAO Rating scale • Holistic Descriptors • Tests must demonstrate validity, reliability and practicality
FINISH START Language testing as seen by the air traffic controller …
Holistic Descriptors • A test should demonstrate: • visual and non-visual communication • communication in the context of the job • And the ability of the candidate to: • check, confirm and clarify information • handle an unexpected turn of events • use an accent or dialect intelligible to the aviation community
Survey on tests(Professor Charles Alderson of Lancaster University) • Survey conducted in 2008 and sent to numerous organisations using tests for pilots and controllers • Only 22 responses • Additionally, all ICAO States contacted • 17/190 responded • Very little evidence attesting to the quality of tests • Unclear whether CAAs have the knowledge to judge the quality of tests
Report concludes • “We can have very little confidence in the meaningfulness, reliability and validity of the aviation language tests currently available for licensure”. • “The consequences of inadequate language tests being used in licensing pilots, air traffic controllers and other aviation personnel are almost too frightening to contemplate”.
But, if I can say that my … • test specifications and test content match the needs of test takers • test examiners (raters and interlocutors) are appropriately trained and accredited • tests have been adequately trialled • test takers are aware of how and on what they will be tested and how their performance will be rated • the reliability of marking is monitored
But I must ask myself … • Am I confident that my test is fully compliant with ICAO LPRs? • Are my controllers adequately prepared for the test? • What actions am I taking to reassure my controllers, especially the older ones, if they fail to get level 4? • Would I accept a controller with a level 4 in Test “XYZ”?
Beyond 2011? • Programmes to maintain language proficiency • Review and audit of testing systems • At least 1 LPR Workshop per year • exchange experience • education assistance • maintain standards of testing
Food for thought … • What is your organisation doing to prepare controllers for the language proficiency test? • Why are we seeing a negative approach to language testing from some of our controllers? And what are we doing about it? • Whose responsibility is it to find answers to these and other questions?
Ensuring that student controllers have at least level 4 proficiency will lay the foundation for the future.
Thank you Any questions?