NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM

Adapting Classroom Activities to Prepare Students for English Language
Tests
HENRY TROY
Nagoya University of Foreign Studies
Abstract
For many EFL students, standardized English language tests are extremely important. They may
need them to study, work or live abroad, while a particular score may result in more educational
opportunities, or increase the chances of being hired or given a raise. The most significant tests
for EFL students in Japan are IELTS, TOEFL, TOEIC and Eiken (Baughn, 2021). It is therefore
important that language teachers are aware of these tests, are able to advise students on theircontent and can use activities in the classroom which assist students in preparing for such exams.
This paper introduces the key aspects of each of these four tests and looks at how, based on myown experience, certain classroom activities can be adapted to assist students in preparing forsuch assessments. Specifically, the usefulness of self- and peer-assessment is emphasized,
allowing the students themselves to become examiners.

Introduction
All students who choose to study English beyond mandatory education have a reason for doing
so. They may wish to make friends from other countries, be able to help foreign visitors or
perhaps they simply enjoy using the language. However, for many learners their goals will
involve either the desire to spend time abroad, or because a certain level of English language
ability will benefit their career. For almost all of these learners, achieving a particular score on an
English proficiency test is essential, and thus English language tests “play a dominant role in theworld today” (Shohamy, 2007, p. 521).
Given the importance of these tests to so many students, teachers of EFL have a responsibility to
be informed of their content. It is true that in higher education the focus internationally has
shifted more to Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) rather than exclusively preparing
students for assessment (Spada, 2007; Brandl, 2021), but these two areas do not need to be
mutually exclusive. It is possible to both develop communicative competence while also helping

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
students to be more “test-ready”. It is argued by some (Miller, 2003; Barnes, 2016) that simply
focusing on assisting students with improving their speaking, reading, writing and listening in a
general course will naturally result in higher test scores, and it may even have negative effects tofocus on test preparation rather than acquiring general language skills. While this may be true tosome extent, there are two issues with this argument. First, overall language proficiency does notalways mean that a learner will get the score they expect on a test. This is because test-taking isitself a skill, and there is evidence that students gain confidence and can benefit generally byengaging in test preparation (Green, 2007; Pan, 2010). Moreover, tests can vary considerably.
For example, students who score highly on the TOEIC listening and reading test, which is thefocused more on adults aiming to improve employment opportunities (IIBC, n.d.a), sometimes
receive a much lower equivalent score on tests like TOEFL and IELTS, which require all four
language skills. Thus, the particularities of each test need to be considered. Second, students
often ask their teachers for advice about the tests they wish to take, even if this is not a primary
focus of their EFL class. It is the duty of EFL instructors to be able to advise their students
appropriately, and this in turn requires knowledge of the most taken English language tests.
This paper first outlines the key features of IELTS, TOEFL, TOEIC and Eiken, which are four ofthe most important and taken tests by students in Japan. Following this the main features of EFL
classrooms that I have encountered in higher education in Japan are identified, as well as what
aspects are lacking which may be relevant in helping students with English language tests. I haveworked full-time at three institutions in Japan and have worked part-time at several universities
across the Aichi area, so the experiences mentioned will be based on those encounters. After that,
relevant activities which may be integrated into current EFL classrooms in higher education areproposed, with a particular focus on self- and peer-assessment. The proposed activities are basedon those I have tested myself in the classroom, but their effectiveness is measured only by
personal observations, with no empirical research yet conducted on them. Finally, the paper
concludes with the drawbacks of the recommended activities and gives an overall assessment of
the role such activities could play in the EFL classroom.
Four Key Tests
Although there are many English language tests, the four chosen for analysis in this paper wereselected due to their prevalence in Japan. IELTS and TOEFL are the two most popularNUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
international standardized English language tests in the country, while TOEIC and Eiken,
although less taken internationally, are the two most popular English tests in the country overall,with over six million taking the tests in 2019 (Eiken, 2019; IIBC, 2020).
IELTS
The International English Testing System (IELTS) may be the most taken English language testin the world, with over 3.5 million test takers worldwide in 2019 (IELTS, 2019), although it isless popular in Japan than the other tests mentioned. IELTS scores are valid for up to two years,
and the test is a recognized means of proving one’s English proficiency level in over 11,000
academic and training institutions (IELTS, n.d.). The test has both academic and generalversions. The former is far more commonly taken, as it is required for higher education and jobs,
while the general test is usually just for those who wish to live abroad. The test itself consists offour sections covering the four main language skills, and lasts approximately three hours. The
speaking test is done face-to-face in an interview and discussion style. Scores on the test range
from one (the lowest) to nine (the highest). The test is still usually taken on paper, althoughcomputer and online versions are becoming more common. It is an expensive test to take, costingover 25,000 yen for Japanese test takers (British Council, n.d.).
TOEFL
The Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) is, along with IELTS, the foremost English
language test worldwide. It has slightly fewer annual test takers than IELTS at over 2.3 million,
but it is similarly recognized and accepted by 11,500 institutions and over 160 countries aroundthe world for academic and visa purposes (ETS, n.d.a). The most popular version of TOEFL is
iBT, which is the internet-based form of the test. Like IELTS, it tests all four language skills, butthey differ in the delivery of the speaking test, which for TOEFL is done via a computer, where
the test-taker is given spoken tasks to do. Scores range from 0 to 120 for TOEFL iBT, and it isslightly more expensive than IELTS at around 28,000 yen (ETS, n.d.b).
TOEIC
Unlike IELTS and TOEFL, the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) is lessutilized internationally, and is instead a test predominantly taken in Japan and South Korea.
There are two versions of the test, one of which includes listening and reading while the other isfor writing and speaking, but the former is chosen by the vast majority of test takers. All

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
questions on the TOEIC test are multiple choice, and the highest possible score is 990.
Vocabulary knowledge is an especially important part of the TOEIC test, and as such it iscommonly required in Japanese companies where an ability to comprehend business English
expressions is especially sought after (IIBC, n.d.b). Another reason for the popularity of the test
in Japan is its relative affordability in comparison to other English language tests, with thecurrent cost of taking the test at 7,810 yen (IIBC, n.d.c).
STEP Eiken
While TOEIC has an international presence despite the fact it is only widely used in the East
Asia, Eiken (meaning “Test in Practical English Proficiency”) is a purely Japanese test, although
it can be used as proof of one’s English level at some institutions internationally (EIKEN, n.d.a).
The lower-level tests are commonly taken by Japanese children from elementary school, and thetest has seven “steps” (grades) from 5 (the easiest) up to 1 (the most difficult). The higher-levelversions of the test – pre-2, 2, pre-1 and 1, are generally taken by those in high school or above.
The questions on each grade of Eiken vary, but it is only from Grade Pre-2 that all four skills ofwriting, speaking, listening and reading are included. Unlike the aforementioned three tests,
Eiken has a pass or fail format. The cost of taking the test varies depending on the age and levelof the test taker, ranging from 900 yen to as much as 12,600 yen (Eiken, n.d.b)
CEFR
As English language tests measure their results in different ways, it is difficult to accurately
assess the equivalent scores across the four tests mentioned. However, using the Common
European Framework of References for Languages (CEFR), a guided estimate can be made. The
CEFR is widely used internationally as a measure of language proficiency, and has six levels
ranging from A1 (basic user) to C2 (proficient user) (Council of Europe, n.d.). Table 1 (nextpage) illustrates how IELTS, TOEFL, TOEIC and Eiken scores compare across the CEFR levels.

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
Table 1
Standardized EFL Test Scoring on the CEFR Scale
CEFR
A1 (Basic user)

IELTS

TOEFL (iBT)

2

TOEIC

Eiken

120 - 2155-3

220 - 540

Pre-2

0-31
A2 (Basic user)

3

B1 (Independent user)

3.5 - 5.5

32 – 59545 - 7752B2 (Independent User)

5.5 - 760 - 101

780 - 945

Pre-1

C1 (Proficient User)

7-8
102 - 120

950 - 990

1

C2 (Proficient User)

8-9

What We Do and Do Not Cover in EFL Classrooms
This section is focused primarily on EFL teaching at the university level. This is because it is
only when students move into their late teens that all of the four tests mentioned above become
relevant for students. This is also a section which is taken mostly from my own personal
experience of teaching at the university level, and so the observations may not be applicable toall those working in other academic institutions. However, since CLT is now accepted as the
predominant method of EFL instruction in most higher education settings (Spada, 2007), there
are suggestions here which may be more widely applicable.
What We Do CoverMy own experiences with English language teaching have mostly seen CLT as the dominantteaching methodology. As CLT focuses heavily on discussion as a means of developing
proficiency, talking in pairs and groups is extremely common in the university EFL classrooms I
have encountered. Presentations and recorded conversations are, in my experience, two of themost common forms of evaluation when it comes to speaking. The other skills of reading,NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
listening and writing are covered to some extent in general English classes in higher education,
but English majors are likely to have separate classes which focus on each skill individually as
well. For listening, this will often involve hearing a conversation several times, withcomprehension questions and discussion questions following. With reading, intensive reading isprevalent at universities, with each text comprehensively covered. Students are often expected to
do the reading at home, with class time reserved for comprehension and discussion. Finally, withwriting classes students tend to write essays over several drafts. These drafts may include one
which receives peer feedback from a classmate, and another which receives teacher feedback.
The focus is on producing an accurate and complete final product.
What We Do Not Cover
All of the teaching methods discussed above are valid for assisting students with their English
learning, but they do miss out some aspects of English use which are vital when taking English
language tests. With speaking practice, I have observed that an interview or task-style of
speaking, where students are simply asked questions one after the other or given specificspeaking tasks within a set time limit, are relatively rare in university classrooms. Because thediscussion-based speaking activities prevalent in CLT emphasize a freer and less structured styleof speaking, they differ from what is expected in the speaking sections of tests like IELTS,
TOEFL and Eiken. As for listening, test takers are frequently only allowed one or two
opportunities to hear the recording, but in university classes students will often have multiple
chances to listen. Moreover, the listening sections of tests like IELTS and TOEFL get
progressively more difficult as the test continues, something which is rarely replicated in theuniversity EFL classrooms I have come across. With reading, as students usually do their readingtasks at home, they do not have a strict time limit. However, time limits are a key part of English
language tests, and it is common for test takers to run out of time in the reading section. The
same is true of writing practice, where students at university are given weeks or months to
produce finished essay drafts, while they are given minutes or hours to do so during language
tests. Lastly, references and citations are commonly required in written essays for university
work, but they are not necessary in English language tests.

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
Classroom Activities
Integrating classroom activities that can assist students with English language tests can beachieved by covering some of the gaps noted above. A key concept that may be beneficial is theidea of making the student the examiner. This is a form of peer- or self-assessment, which has
been shown to have great benefits to both student learning and understanding of their own
proficiency level (Adachi et al., 2018). There is even some evidence that peer- and selfassessment may result in greater improvements for students than teacher feedback (Bowman,2017). The following two activities use the concept of making the student into an examiner inorder to improve their preparedness for English language tests.
Activity 1: Speaking Self/Peer Examining. With this activity, the student takes on the role ofexaminer to assess the performance of either themselves, their peer or a third party via a video
recording. Although peer assessment in speaking activities is common at university level,
standardizing the conditions and scoring is not. The student-examiners would be given criteria bywhich to assess the test taker, and this could follow the conditions of a relevant test such as the
IELTS, TOEFL or Eiken speaking tests, all of which have public versions of their evaluation
criteria. The students would then give themselves, their classmate or the third party a score alongwith an explanation as to why their score matches the relevant criteria for that level. Repeating
this process over several iterations with the teacher monitoring and giving feedback would resultin greater standardization, and this would in turn give students a better idea of their own
proficiency level.
There are limitations to this approach. As Joo (2016) explains, student-examiners face
more challenges than professional examiners as they have “limited proficiency in the language”
and “lack of anonymity”. However, there is significant evidence that self- and peer-assessmentof one’s speaking can enhance one’s speaking ability (Joo, 2016). Moreover, Huang (2016)
found that self- and peer-assessment has “great potential for learning and instruction” (p. 803). It
is clear that for the conditions for standardized learner self- and peer-assessment must be
thoroughly prepared. According to Joo (2016), these include “the clear provision of task-related
criteria, sufficient training, considerations of the learners’ traits and their perception, as well as
the strong integration with the curriculum” (p. 80). With these conditions met, it is possible forself- or peer-assessment in a standardized format to be successfully integrated into the language
classroom.

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
Activity 2: Writing Self/Peer Assessment
Like the speaking self- and peer-examining just described, this activity would involveassessment of one’s writing not by the teacher, but by the student themselves or a classmate. In
contrast to the kind of peer review that is common in universities when students write drafts of
their essays, the writing activity would follow the format of the writing section of an English
language test. Perhaps the most straightforward to utilize would be that of the Eiken test, as it
involves the writing of 120-150 words answering an essay question in 20 minutes. An example atask question is given in Figure 1.
Figure 1
Example Eiken Writing Test: Pre-1 Level
Write 120-150 words on this topic. You have 20 minutes to write your answer.
Write an essay on the given topic.
Use TWO of the points below to support your answer.
Structure: introduction, main body, and conclusion
Suggested length: 120-150 words
TOPIC: Agree or Disagree / University education should be free••••

POINTS••••

Education
Getting a job
Student debt
University funding

Giving a time limit, as well as no time beforehand to research the topic question, would matchthe conditions one encounters when writing in an English language test. Once the students havefinished writing, they would assess their own and each other’s work based on the criteria givenby the teacher, which once more could follow one of the publicly available band descriptors fromthe English language tests already mentioned. The students would thus become moreexperienced at writing under the pressures of test-like conditions, as well as gaining a greater
understanding of their writing proficiency. As with the speaking activity, there have been studies
which have suggested standardized self- and peer-assessment of one’s writing can improve theproficiency of learners, such as the one by Mazloomi and Khabri (2018).

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
Conclusion
This paper has examined the different English language tests that Japanese students often take,identified gaps in higher education in terms of preparation for language tests and suggested
relevant activities which can aid test preparation. It is not an exaggeration to say that the scoreslearners achieve on these tests can often determine their futures, so it is vital that language
teachers are able to help them to achieve their goals.
Nevertheless, there are drawbacks to focusing students too much on proficiency level via
the activities outlined in this paper. First, the students may become demotivated by comparing
their own proficiency level to others. Moreover, not all students will require a certain score on
English language tests, and may not see the relevance in engaging in activities which focus on
preparing them for such exams. Lastly, there is the issue that concentrating too much on one’sscore may have a negative impact on the more important goal of acquiring language throughpractice, and that teachers should instead focus on engaging students in the process of acquiring
general language skills (Barnes, 2016). However, these problems are not insurmountable. If theactivities are made enjoyable and not given the pressure that a real test entails, this may assist
with student motivation when they are undertaken. In terms of students comparing themselves toothers, this often happens in classes anyway, and can be avoided somewhat in the activities
suggested by using videos of third parties and assessing their work rather than using self- or
peer-assessment. As for the assertion that the focus should be on acquisition via practice rather
than preparing for tests, it is recommended that these activities be incorporated into courses as
supplementary tasks, rather than primary aspects of a course. As Wang et al. (2014) put it,“teachers…assimilate more communicative language content into the teaching because of thepositive washback from test preparation”. Thus, CLT and test preparation can coexist.
The activities outlined in this paper are merely suggestive and although the writer of thispaper has used them successfully in class, there is no specific empirical evidence to support theiruse. Nevertheless, given the importance of English language tests to so many of our students, it
is our duty as educators to at the very least be aware of such tests, and if possible, to assist themin achieving whatever score they require to meet their aspirations.
BIO DATAHenry Troy is currently a Language Instructor at Nanzan University, having been an EFLNUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
Lecturer at Nagoya University of Foreign Studies at the time this symposium took place. He has
eleven years of experience in language teaching, and his areas of research interest include corpus
linguistics, English language tests and media literacy.

References
Adachi, C., Hong-meng Tai, J., and Dawson, P. (2018). Academics’ perceptions of thebenefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education. Assessment &Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 294-306.
Barnes, M. (2016). The Washback of the TOEFL iBT in Vietnam. Australian Journal of
Teacher Education, 41(7). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n7.10
Baughn, S. (2021). Teaching to the Test: An Overview of English Proficiency Tests in Japan.
http://connect.ajet.net/2021/10/25/teaching-to-the-test-an-overview-of-englishproficiency-tests-in-japan/
Bowman, J. E. (2017). Engaging students in the assessment process: a quantitative study ofpeer- and self-assessment. (Publication No. 10683143) [Doctoral dissertation, Notre
Dame of Maryland University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Brandl, K. (2021). Communicative Language Teaching in Action: Putting Principles toWork(2nd ed.). Cognella.
British Council. (n.d.). Book your test at an official IELTS centre. https://www.britishcouncil.jp/
en/exam/ielts/book-test
Council of Europe. (n.d.). The CEFR Levels. https://www.coe.int/en/web/commoneuropean-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions
Cummins, J. & Dawson, C. (Eds.) (2007). International Handbook of English Language
Teaching. Springer.
EIKEN. (2019). Examinee statistics. https://www.eiken.or.jp/eiken/en/eiken-tests/stats/NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
EIKEN. (n.d.a). Overview of the EIKEN tests. https://www.eiken.or.jp/eiken/en/eikentests/overview/#:~:text=The%20EIKEN%20grades%20are%20given,in%20orde
r%20to%20receive%20certification.
EIKEN. (n.d.b). Examination guide. https://www-eiken-orjp.translate.goog/eiken/schedule/?_x_tr_sl=ja&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp#v2-content-03
ETS. (n.d.a). About the TOEIC Listening and Reading Test. https://www.ets.org/toeic/test-takers/
listening-reading/about
ETS. (n.d.b). Find Test Centers and Dates. https://v2.ereg.ets.org/ereg/public/workflowmanager/
schlWorkflow?_p=TEL
Green, A. (2007). IELTS washback in context: preparation for academic writing in higher
education. Cambridge University Press.
Huang, S. C. (2016). Understanding learners’ self-assessment and self-feedback on their foreign
language speaking performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6),803-820.
IELTS. (n.d.). Choose IELTS – the world’s favourite test of English. https://www.ielts.org/fortest-takers/why-choose-ielts
IELTS. (2019). IELTS grows to 3.5 million a year. https://www.ielts.org/news/2019/ieltsgrows-to-three-and-a-half-million-a-year
IIBC. (n.d.a). About the TOEIC Program. https://www.iibcglobal.org/english/toeic/
toeic_program .html
IIBC. (n.d.b). About the TOEIC Listening and Reading Test. https://www.iibcglobal.org/
english/toeic /test/lr/about.html
IIBC. (n.d.c). How to Apply/Test Fees. https://www.iibc-global.org/english/toeic/test/lr/guide01.html
IIBC. (2020). TOEIC Program: Data and Analysis 2020. http://www.iibcglobal.org/library/default/english/toeic/official_data/pdf/DAA_english.pdf

NUFS TEACHER DEVELOPMENT SYMPOSIUM
Joo, S. H. (2016). Self- and Peer-Assessment of Speaking. Studies in Linguistics &TESOL, 16(2), 68-83.
Mazloomi, S. & Khabri, M. (2018). The impact of self-assessment on language
writing skill. Innovations in Education and Teaching International,

learners’55(1), 91-100.

Miller, K. (2003). The Pitfalls of Implementing TOEIC Preparation Courses. The Yoshinogawa
Review, 26.
Pan, Y. C. (2010). Enhancing Students’ Communicative Comeptency and Test-Taking

SkillsThrough TOEIC Preparatory Materials. TESOL Journal, 3, pp. 81-91.
Shohamy, E. (2007). The Power of Language Tests, the Power of the English Language and theRole of ELT. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International

Handbook of English

Language Teaching (pp. 521-531). Springer.
Spada, N. (2007). Communicative Language Teaching: Current Status and Future Prospects. In
J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International Handbook ofEnglish Language

Teaching (pp. 271-288). Springer.
Wang, C., Yan, J., & Liu, B. (2014). An Empirical Study on Washback Effects of theInternet-Based College English Test Band 4 in China. English Language Teaching,
7(6), 26-53. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n6p26