2017 CAASPR Language Proficiency Standard - … · S W L R O S W L R O S W R L ACOTRO 8 8 8 9 7 7.5 6.5 7 7 92 26 22 22 22 ... purposes, and contain a select ... scales for each of

1

2017 CAASPR Language Proficiency Standard

Backgrounder

Introduction

This Backgrounder documents the evidence consulted and the methodology applied in the

establishment of a language proficiency standard for the Canadian Alliance of Audiology and Speech-

Language Pathology Regulators (CAASPR) in 2017. The background research was conducted by

consultants with expertise in regulatory policy and language proficiency standard setting. The CAASPR

Language Proficiency Standard was presented to the Board and approved on November 6, 2017.

Context

Internationally educated health professionals seeking registration in Canada must meet local standards

of practice. These professional standards are set by legislation and operationalized by provincial

regulatory bodies. Commonly, this process includes academic credentials recognition, evidence of

recent clinical practice, and successful completion of professional competency examinations. For

international applicants whose language of training and practice has not been in one of Canada’s official

languages (English or French) demonstration of language proficiency is often an additional requirement

(Figure 1).

Figure 1: Registration Pathway for Internationally Educated Health Professionals

Within this context, language proficiency is a legal requirement designed to uphold professional

standards of practice. In addition to ensuring that international applicants have an equivalent level of

language ability to that of local practitioners, the language proficiency standard is concerned with the

protection of the public. The language proficiency standard is designed to ensure that international

applicants have a level of language that enables them to comprehend practice policies, interact

Backgrounder for 2017 CAASPR Language Proficiency Standard

2

effectively within a health care team, and critically, communicate with clients and their families or

guardians.

The CAASPR Language Proficiency Standard is intended as a harmonized standard across Canadian

provinces. The standard upholds the principles of the fair-access law which outlines the broad, general

duty of regulatory bodies to have transparent, objective, impartial and fair registration practices. These

principles are upheld as best practice guidelines by CAASPR members and inform the development of

standards, including the language proficiency standard.

To meet these principles, the language proficiency standard must clearly describe the conditions under

which evidence of language proficiency is required, the rationale for the language proficiency standard,

and evidence that the standard is relevant to practice. Finally, the way in which candidates meet the

standard must be objective and accessible.

Methodology

In an effort to ensure that registration practices are objective and fair to international candidates,

regulators continuously review their policies and by-laws. With support from the federal government,

attention has also been paid to harmonizing registration policies across provinces to facilitate labour

mobility.

Building on existing knowledge and practice, this project recommends a standardized language

proficiency standard that would be acceptable to all CASSPR members. The following steps were taken:

1. Scan test use across the environment

2. Leverage research conducted to benchmark the language demands of the profession

3. Analyse research available on comparing, linking, and mapping test scores

The next section describes each of these steps in detail.


3

1. Scan of Current language Proficiency Standards Practices in the Environment

A scan of existing language proficiency practices for similar professions and across jurisdictions revealed

that two tests are commonly used by regulators: the International English Language Testing System

(IELTS)1 and the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL)2. In Canada, the Canadian Language

Benchmarks, or CLB, are standardized proficiency levels used as a reference for government-sponsored

immigrant language training programs and immigration policy. These CLB benchmarks have also been

used in research to analyse the language levels required in Professional practice (see Table 1).

Table 1: Language Proficiency Standards Scan

Agency CLB Benchmarking IELTS TOEFL

S W L R O S W L R O S W R L

ACOTRO 8 8 8 9 7 7.5 6.5 7 7 92 26 22 22 22

Alliance PT 8 8 8 9 7 92 21 21 21 21

CSMLS 8 7 7 -- 24 22 22 20

FORAC -- -- -- -- 7.5 -- -- -- -- --

Nursing 8 7 8 8 7 7 7 7.5 6.5 -- -- -- -- --

Australia (Aud) -- -- -- -- -- 7 7 7 7 -- -- -- -- --

New Zealand (Aud) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

UK (HCPC – HAD) -- -- -- -- 7 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 100

New Zealand (SLT) -- -- -- -- 8 8.5 -- -- -- -- --

UK (HCPC – SLT) -- -- -- -- 8 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 118

UK - MNP -- -- -- -- 7 7 7 7 7 -- -- -- -- --

CSHHPBC 8 100 26 26

ACSLP 8 100 26 26

SASLPA 8 -- -- -- -- --

CASLMP 100 26 26

CASLPO 8 100 26 26

NBASLPA -- -- -- -- --

NLCHP 7.5 7.5 92 24 20 20 20

The scan of language proficiency standards and test usage across the environment provides a starting

point to harmonize existing practices and identifies what other organizations are doing successfully. The

scan demonstrates that IELTS scores typically accepted by regulators were in the 6.5 to 8.5 range, and

that there are differences across the skill levels, with some regulators requiring a higher score for certain

language skills, such as speaking and listening.

Also of note is the CLB benchmarking analysis for several Canadian health professions, and the

corresponding IELTS and TOEFL scores which serve as a reference for this work.

1 https://www.ielts.org/ 2 https://www.ets.org/toefl


4

As documented in Table 2, a review of applications by international applicants to CAASPR member

organizations from 2012 to 2016 shows the vast majority of applicants are from countries where English

or French are the main language (United States, Belgium, Australia, United Kingdom). Also of note is the

number of applicants from countries that have multiple official languages, including English (India,

Ireland, Philippines). This indicates the need to clearly articulate exemptions to the language proficiency

testing in the policy.

Table 2: International Applicants 2012-2016

Source Country Total Source Country Total

US 111 Sweden 1

Belgium 24 Switzerland 1

Australia 12 Togo 1

UK 9 Algeria 1

India 9 Armenia 1

Ireland 5 Egypt 1

France 3 Iran 1

Philippines 3 Japan 1

South Africa 2 Jordan 1

Unknown 2 Lebanon 1

Brazil 2 Peru 1

N. Zealand 2 Romania 1

2. Language Benchmarks for the Professions

In 2013 a language benchmarking study was conducted by the Centre for Canadian Language

Benchmarks (CCLB) under contract with CAASPR. The study, Benchmarking the Language Demands of

Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, described the type, scope, and composition of language use

in the audiology and speech-language pathology workplaces. The study generated a comprehensive list

of language tasks that audiologists and speech language pathologists perform as part of their jobs, and

assigned language benchmarks for both professions in English and French.

The CCLB report concluded that audiologists and speech-language pathologists carry out language tasks

at a range of levels that are almost identical for both professions, and across the two official languages.

Data analysis determined that Canadian Language Benchmark (CLB) or niveaux de compétence

linguistique canadiens (NCLC) 9 for all language skill areas (Speaking, Listening, Reading, and Writing)


5

appropriately reflect the language tasks associated with the typical job tasks for full working capacity in

both English and French for audiologists and speech language pathologists.

This study provides a solid foundation for establishing language proficiency standards as it offers a clear

statement of the language levels required for practice. A defensible language proficiency standard is one

that has a clear link to authentic and demonstrable language use in the workplace so that it is relevant

and defensible. The language benchmarks study offers the language level against which the proficiency

standard can be established.

3. Mapping Test Scores and Proficiency Levels

Language proficiency scales such as the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) are not tests; instead they

describe different levels of Language proficiency as bands, referring to an extensive range of

communicative competencies for each band. Language tests, on the other hand, are designed for

specific purposes, and contain a select set of communicative tasks. Different language tests are based on

different blueprints, use different proficiency scales, and test different constructs. Test score scales are

therefore not equivalent to one another in a straightforward way, and test levels are not equivalent to

proficiency scales unless they have been designed in alignment to them. As illustrated in Table 3, each

scale has a unique set of intervals between levels.

Table 3: Language Proficiency and Test Score Scales

Proficiency Scale Test 1: TOEFL Test 2: IELTS

CLB Levels Score Range Score Range

12 120 9

11 110 8

10 100 7

9 90 6

8 80 5

7 70 4

6 60 3

5 50 2

4 40 1

3 30 1

2 20 0

1 10

A universally accepted equivalency scale for language proficiency tests and scales does not exist. The

reason is two-fold: first, each scale and test is uniquely designed; and second, the score requirements

will differ according to their intended use. For example, the scores required for university admission will

differ from scores required for immigration. It is generally accepted that the test score users (i.e.,

regulatory bodies or universities) should set the required score through a standard setting process or

through expert opinion that links the test score to the target language use. In the case of CAASPR, this

means aligning the language benchmarks required for practice to the results on IELTS and TOEFL.


6

The CCLB study identified scores for each of the four language skills: Speaking, Listening, Reading, and

Writing. IELTS and TOEFL have sub-tests for each of these skill areas and, as illustrated in Table 4, TOEFL

and IELTS have different score scales for each of these sub-tests. IELTS has a band score scale of 1 to 9

for Speaking and Writing, whereas TOEFL scores Speaking and Writing on a scale of 1 to 30. The score

scales for Reading and Writing are 1 to 40 for IELTS and 1 to 30 for TOEFL.

Table 4: Language Proficiency and Test Score Scales by Language Skill

Proficiency Scale Test 1: TOEFL Test 2: IELTS


S W L R S W R L S W L R

12 12 12 12 30 30 30 30 9 9 40 40

11 11 11 11 8 8

10 10 10 10 7 7

9 9 9 9 6 6

8 8 8 8 5 5

7 7 7 7 4 4

6 6 6 6 3 3

5 5 5 5 2 2

4 4 4 4 1 1

3 3 3 3 1 1

2 2 2 2 0 0

1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

S = Speaking W = Writing R = Reading L= Listening

One approach to aligning scores across tests it to conduct a formal standard setting study for each

subskill of each test. In fact, both TOEFL and IELTS have already conducted such studies. We therefore

made reference to existing official research studies when considering how to align the scores across

tests, and then mapped it on to the CLB 9 benchmark levels. Table 5 shows the results of two studies

that can help make the connection between CLB 9, IELTS, and TOEFL.

The first study is an Educational Test Services (ETS) research report, Linking TOEFL iBT ™ Scores to IELTS®

Scores3. The study analysed a sample of 1,153 students who had both IELTS and TOEFL scores and

applied an equipercentile linking technique to identify the corresponding TOEFL score for each IELTS

score. The equivalent scores are indicated by the two-headed arrow to the right in Table 5. The scores

in green highlight for Test 1: TOEFL and TEST 2: IELTS AC. The study identified that the TOEFL scores

equivalent to IELTS AC 8 in each skill area are: Speaking 28, Writing 30, Reading 29, and Listening 28.

From this study one can see that the scores of IELTS 8 results in a very high score overall, representing

the scores of 28 or higher out of a 30 point scale on TOEFL.

The second resource consulted was the official language test equivalency charts from Citizenship and

Immigration Canada (CIC, now Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, IRCC)4 which describe the

equivalencies between the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLBs) (for English), the Niveaux de

compétence linguistique canadiens (for French), and the results of designated language tests, including

3 ETS (2010) Linking TOEFL iBTTM Scores to IELTS® Scores – A Research Report. Princeton, N.J.: ETS 4 Retrieved from http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/language/charts.asp on May 4, 2017


7

IELTS GT. The two headed arrow to the left in Table 5 indicates the equivalency of CLB 9 and IELTS GT

according to the Government of Canada official equivalency tables.

Table 5: Official Equivalencies established by Two Studies

The results shown above in Table 5 were then considered in reference to the levels of proficiency as

reported by the test administrators. Table 6 illustrates the score ranges for advanced (green)

intermediate (orange) and basic (red). Notice that CLB 9 is a beginner advanced level.

Table 6: Levels of Proficiency per skill area as reported by administrator

Proficiency Scale Test 2: IELTS GT Test 2: IELTS AC

Test 1: TOEFL


Score Range

S W L R S W L R S W L R

S W R L

12 12 12 12

11 11 11 11 9 9 40 40 9 9 40 40

30 30 30 30

10 10 10 10 8 8 35 35 8 8 35 35

28 29 28

9 9 9 9 7 7 30 30 7 7 30 34

26

8 8 8 8 6 6 23 23 6 6 23 30

25 24

7 7 7 7 5 5 16 16 5 5 16 23

23

6 6 6 6 4 4

4 4

15

22 22

5 5 5 5 3 3

3 3

18

4 4 4 4 2 2

2 2

17

3 3 3 3 1 1

1 1

14 14

2 2 2 2 1 1

1 1

10

1 1 1 1 0 0

0 0

0 0 0 0

Advanced Intermediate Basic

The official data available requires some informed assumptions. The first is that IELTS GT and IELTS AC

scores are equivalent. The second is that the levels of proficiency per skill area as reported by

administrators are reliable indicators of advanced, intermediate, and basic proficiency.


8

Conclusions

IELTS and TOEFL are accepted by regulators in English speaking environments, as is the Test d’évaluation

du français (TEF) in French speaking environments. All of these exams are accessible internationally and

have strong reliability characteristics. In Quebec, the Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF) sets

the language standard for that province, therefore this is also an acceptable test.

There is not a clear equivalency statement for CLB to TOEFL. Based on the data available and the

expertise of the language proficiency consultant, recommendations were made as outlined in Table 7.

This recommendation adjusts some of the research findings as follows:

IELTS 7.5 is the most commonly accepted cut scores for regulators of like professions. This

“reality data” supports the 7.5 recommendation. Although IELTS 7 is identified as equivalent to

CLB 9 in the CLB – IELTS CIC equivalency chart, the descriptors for CLB 7.5 more closely reflect

the language demands described in the CCLB report, Benchmarking the Language Demands of

Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology.

TOEFL scores were maintained at the beginning advanced level for each subskill.

Table 7: Consultant Recommended Scores

Proficiency Scale Test 2: IELTS AC Test 2: IELTS GT

Test 1: TOEFL


Score Range

S W L R S W L R S W L R

S W R L

12 12 12 12

11 11 11 11 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

30 30 30 30

10 10 10 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

28 29 28

9 9 9 9 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

26 26

8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7

25 24

7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6

23

6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

22 22

5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

18

4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

17

3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

14 14

2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

10

1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

For French, the alignment of NCLC 9 is made based on an existing official equivalency chart entitled

Intervalles des scores correspondant aux principaux Niveaux de compétence linguistique canadiens

(NCLC) et niveaux du Cadre européen commun de référence pour les langues (CECR) pour chaque épreuve

du Test d’évaluation de français pour le Canada (TEF Canada)5.

5 Retrieved from https://www.centredelanguefrancaise.paris/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Correspondance-Niveaux-NCLC-scores-TEF-CANADA.pdf on May 4, 2017


9

Following the presentation of this data and discussion with the CAASPR Board, adjustments were made

to reflect the following:

The higher listening IELTS score alignment with CLB 9 as per the CIC equivalency scale should be

taken into consideration and the listening score adjusted to IELTS 8.

Overall scores for TOEFL and IELTS should be deleted.

Table 8 shows the recommended cut scores to be used for CAASPR’s language proficiency standard.

Table 8: Scores Approved for CAASPR’s Language Proficiency Standard

Language English French

Test TOEFL inter-net

based test (iBT)

IELTS

(AC or GT)

Test d’évaluation du français (TEF)

or TEF Canada

Office québécois de la

langue française (OQLF)

Required

minimum

score(s)

Speaking: 26

Listening: 26

Reading: 22

Writing: 24

Speaking: 7.5

Listening: 8

Reading: 7.5

Writing: 7.5

Level 5

Expression orale (speaking): 371

Compréhension orale (listening): 298

Compréhension écrite (reading): 248

Expression écrite (writing): 371

Passing mark set by the

OQLF & reviewed by the

OOAQ

10

References

Centre de langue française de la CCI Paris Île-de-France Test d’évaluation de français (TEF) Canada

Retrieved from www.centredelanguefrancaise.paris/tests-diplomes/test-evaluation-francais-

tef/tef-canada/ on May 4, 2017

Centre for Canadian Language Benchmarks (December 2013) Benchmarking the Language Demands of

Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology. Report Prepared for the Canadian Alliance of

Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology Regulators (CAASPR)

Educational Testing Services (ETS) (2010) ETS Linking TOEFL iBT ™ Scores to IELTS® Scores – A Research

Report. Retrieved from

https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/linking_toefl_ibt_scores_to_ielts_scores.pdf.

Government of Canada. Language test equivalency charts. Retrieved from

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/language/charts.asp on May 4, 2017

TOEFL iBT® and IELTS® Academic Module Scores Score Comparison Tool Retrieved from

https://www.ets.org/toefl/institutions/scores/compare/

Documents

2017 CAASPR Language Proficiency Standard - … · S W L R O S W L R O S W R L ACOTRO 8 8 8 9 7 7.5 6.5 7 7 92 26 22 22 22 ... purposes, and contain a select ... scales for each of