Task types

Task 1

The examiner (interlocutor) makes the introductions and confirms the identities of the candidates.

The interlocutor leads the interaction with the two candidates with a series of spoken questions on familiar topic frames drawn from the candidates’ own specific environment of professional or recreational aviation activity. The candidates are asked to demonstrate their language proficiency in short exchanges concerning common, concrete operationally-related topics. The topics are of a general piloting or air traffic controlling nature may include duties, responsibilities, procedures, routines, activities, career, environment and circumstances relevant to the aviation-related context in which the candidates operate. 1

This part tests the candidates’ ability to exchange aviation activity related factual information in plain English and to express attitudes and opinions with reference to the past, present and future as they respond to questions and expand on responses using the language of general interaction. The topic frames are considered to be of both general and specific interest to, suitable for, and easily understood by, aviation specialists. There is interlocutor flexibility in the use of high- and low-end Language Proficiency Rating Scale discriminators.

Candidates are required to respond to the interlocutor’s questions, and to listen and respond to the contributions of their partner. Although the interlocutor leads the interaction, the candidates are encouraged to interact both with the interlocutor and their fellow candidate.

Task 2

Candidates discuss with each other the nature and details of an appropriate non-routine incident selected by the interlocutor and presented as an aural (voice-only) prompt (audio recording). 2

Positioned in such a way that they cannot see each other, the candidates listen to a short aeronautical communication involving the development of an unusual circumstance or emergency situation. Within a given time limit, the candidates are asked to discuss with one another the details of the incident before one candidate may, if required, be nominated to present a concise summary report in plain English to the interlocutor. The candidates interact with each other for the duration of the task. The discussion of the communication allows the candidates to demonstrate both aural comprehension and discourse management strategies. At the conclusion of the candidates’ discussion and report, the interlocutor may ask one or two ‘rounding-off’ questions.

More than one aural prompt may be played and discussed. The aural prompts to be played and their number is at the discretion of the interlocutor.

The task gives candidates the opportunity to demonstrate their ability to comprehend gist and detail in a voice-only context, their ability to invite and request the input of others, and their ability to report communications concisely. Additionally, the task allows them to show the range and accuracy of their language use in describing and reporting non-routine events and occurrences.

Candidates are expected to share the interaction requirements of the task, initiating and responding as required with the appropriate reporting, checking, clarifying, correcting and confirming of information and details sufficient to enable them to complete the task.

The recording of the communication is played only once but the candidates can ask the interlocutor for clarification or confirmation of any of the information or details contained in the communication. Their ability to recognise and acknowledge their lack of understanding or possible misunderstanding and to ask questions accordingly forms part of the assessment of their performance in the task.

As with Task 1, candidates are expected to show that they are aware of the kind of spoken interaction and language required to accomplish the task, and must be able to demonstrate the appropriate use of language functions to enable them do so. In essence, an information-transfer task relating narrowly to the factual content of a recorded input, Task 2 is a communicative task which has a defined input and a largely predictable output. Candidates should report factually and concisely the content of the communication and avoid speculated explanations, opinions and events that lie outside the given input.

The content of the communication provides the ‘right’ answer to the task. Candidates in disagreement over the information or details contained in the communication are expected to attempt to resolve their disagreement by use of appropriate techniques of checking, confirming or clarifying. While full agreement between the candidates is not required, it is certainly to be advised.

Task 3

The interlocutor describes to each candidate an aviation-related unusual circumstance or emergency situation appropriate to that candidate’s area of operational activity. At the same time, the candidate is given a cue-card listing a series of four generalised content-focused prompts designed to help in the structuring a response.

The unusual circumstance or emergency situation selected may be further defined or customised by the interlocutor to suit more precisely the operational environment of the candidate. Candidates are given one minute to prepare their responses after the input of the interlocutor, but should ensure that they have fully understood the scenarios as given by the interlocutor before they begin.

The candidate is required to produce an extended piece of discourse in the form of a briefing of approximately two minutes duration explaining the key elements and necessary communications and actions associated with their scenarios, along with any other considerations or possible implications they may wish to mention. Neither the listening candidate nor the interlocutor will interrupt the extended discourse. At the end of the speaking turn, the listening candidate will be required to ask questions about, comment on or add to the briefing given. The interlocutor may then ask one or two concluding questions. There is interlocutor flexibility in the use of high- and low-end Language Proficiency Rating Scale discriminators.

Listening candidates are made aware that they should not interrupt during the speaking turn of their partner candidates, but that they should remain attentive throughout. The listening candidate will be asked to respond to the briefing presented with a relevant and appropriate question or comment after the speaking partner has concluded. A candidate’s failure to do so may be seen as a failure of comprehension ability or interactional skills.

When the turn of the first candidate has been completed, the task is repeated with the second candidate.

Although the unusual circumstance or emergency situations selected for the two candidates are different, the four prompts listed on the cue-cards are the same for all. The candidate must talk about the unusual circumstance or emergency situation given and should address each of the four prompts for effective task achievement. The prompts are included in order to help the candidates structure their discourse. A candidate’s failure to address appropriately each of the prompts on the cue-card may affect task achievement and overall rating.

Task 3 tests the candidates’ ability to produce an extended piece of discourse. Candidates show their ability to organise their language to express their thoughts and ideas coherently and cohesively, to manage discourse and to use appropriate communication strategies. Depending upon the particular approach to the task adopted, candidates may require the use of any or all of the following functions of language: giving information, describing situations, simulating, summarising and reporting communications, evaluating options and incidents (ranking, eliminating, identifying, comparing, contrasting, determining advantages and disadvantages), modality, speculating and hypothesising. As the listening partner candidate asks a question or offers comments, further opportunity exists to use the language of checking, clarification and confirmation, exchanging ideas and opinions, expressing and justifying opinions, agreeing and disagreeing.

Similarly to Task 2, Task 3 has a defined input and a largely predictable output in that the scenario given and the prompts set the context and purpose of the speaking turn and the areas a candidate should best address in order to achieve this purpose. It is very important that candidates cover all of the essential points of the input in their answer so that the listening candidate and interlocutor are fully informed. Candidates should be aware that the overall aim of the task is to achieve a positive effect on their audience with regard to communicative competence. Coherence and cohesion, clear organisation, use of aviation appropriate lexis, control, accuracy and fluency and range of language and overall intelligibility are all important features of task achievement. 3

Task 3 (Extended)

The interlocutor may use discretion in the inclusion of an extended Task 3.

When considered appropriate, Task 3 (Extended) assesses the candidates’ ability to discuss topics and issues in more depth. The task allows the interlocutor to explore the extent of the candidate’s proficiency at the higher end of the ICAO Language Proficiency Rating Scale.

The interlocutor encourages, leading where necessary, a discussion of a more abstract nature between the candidates based on verbal questions thematically linked to Task 3, developing topics or issues related to the briefings the candidates have presented.

The candidates are required to formulate and develop a position in relation to the questions and statements of their partner candidate or the interlocutor. The candidates’ positions and ideas should be supported by evidence or examples drawn from the candidates’ own experience or training.

The discussion lasts between three and four minutes. The examiner then asks one or two rounding-off questions. The task gives candidates the opportunity to show further their range of language and their ability to invite the opinions and ideas of their partner in a task in which the input is less defined than in others and the output less predictable. 4

Conclusion of the interview

At the conclusion of the Test of Speaking, candidates are thanked for attending, but are given no indication of the level of their achievement.

1 c.f. ICAO Doc 9835 Ch.6 Aviation Language Testing 6.8

2 c.f. ICAO Doc 9835 Ch.6 Aviation Language Testing 6.5 and ICAO and ICAO Cir 318-AN/180 Ch.2 Test Design and Construct 1.1.6

3 c.f. ICAO Doc 9835 Ch.6 Aviation Language Testing 6.8 and ICAO and ICAO Cir 318-AN/180 Ch.2 Test Design and Construct

4 c.f. ICAO Doc 9835 Ch.6 Aviation Language Testing 6.8 and ICAO and ICAO Cir 318-AN/180 Ch.2 Test Design and Construct