A language exam is a standardised assessment kit that evaluates language learners’ level of language skills. More specifically, its purpose is to determine the examinee’s proficiency in reading and listening comprehension, as well as their ability to construct spoken and written texts.

This article aims to evaluate whether today’s language exams are sufficiently effective and up-to-date in order to assess examinee’s language skills based on the novel challenges of the 21st century. The article’s second objective is to shed light on necessary improvements that could make language exams more relatable to today’s obstacles in language use.

One of the areas where today’s language exams are not sufficiently applicable is the use of dictionaries during exams.

Despite all the technological advancements that humanity has achieved in building online dictionaries, which we can use to find the meaning of unknown key words in a text, examinees are still expected to avoid using them. This observation applies to all four areas including reading, speaking, listening and writing.

Memorising a certain set of words still has not become unnecessary since tasks are required to be completed within a time frame, therefore, examinees would not have adequate time to check each word.

However, in reality, people can use an online dictionary whenever they feel the need to even if it is for writing an email, preparing for a live presentation, reading a news article or other forms of written language.

Therefore, I see no reason as to why we should ban the use of a dictionary while assessing on what level an examinee is able to use a certain foreign language. Moreover, writing tasks should be permitted to be completed with the aid of an online thesaurus.

Furthermore, even when we listen to a podcast or watch videos, movies and TV shows, we have the opportunity to rewind the recording to listen again for a better understanding and look up the words we are not familiar with.

We can even use subtitles when they are available. Moreover, even if a video lacks subtitles, there are several online tools that can automatically create subtitles, so even if our ears do not work, our eyes can still catch the words we are unaware of and check them in a dictionary.

On the other hand, there are certain situations when it would still look ridiculous to use a dictionary. For instance, when we talk to someone face-to-face and we have to reply on the spot, or when we listen to a live show that cannot be rewound.

Overall, even though there are a few limitations of using dictionaries in everyday use of a foreign language, there are several occasions when people would turn to a dictionary. Therefore, forbidding them simply prevents language exams from accurately reflecting real-world language use.

One more aspect as to why language exams are ineffective in assessing one’s true potential in using a language is the lack of personalisastion of exam papers.

Language exams cover a great deal of topics, which, even though seems rational, it rather shows an examinee’s interests and lack of interests instead of focusing on a person’s unique curiousity.

For example, I am not a fan of chatting about environmental problems. Although I admit and am aware of the seriousness of environmental problems, I lack the level of curiosity and expertise that could help me showcase my language skills.

Even though I am a language tutor, this topic is the one where I feel highly uncomfortable because I feel insecure and vulnerable in the situation due to the lack of my competence in the topic.

At the same time, I could read, listen, write and talk about learning foreign languages, media-related topics, movies and TV shows, social studies and politics for days without a pause, so, among others, these topics would be more helpful for me to demonstrate my communication skills.  

However, according to language exams, a human being must be familiar with nearly each area of life on the planet, meanwhile, in reality, people tend to choose fields they are naturally drawn to based on their personality when it comes to picking a career path, colleagues and friends they engage with in various activities.

It would be much more beneficial if language exams let examinees choose from a wide range of topics and their exam papers were uniquely composed of the tasks that cover only the chosen areas.

It is worth noting, however, that there are subjects that each of us probably is and has to be familiar with. For example, questions about one’s personal opinions and experiences such as free time activities, eating habits, dreams, music, or clothing.

In my personal experience, most language exams grant sufficient time for examinees to complete reading tasks, meanwhile, the designated time limit for writing tasks is much shorter than needed.

To present my argument, I would like to make a valid comparison. One of the most prestigious language exams, IELTS (International English Language Testing System) requires its examinees to compose two written pieces consisting of 400 words overall within a 60-minute time interval. Two pieces, one of which is a 250-word argumentative essay.

However, when I was a university student attending a media course including journalism modules, I had to hand in 500-word pieces within a weeklong deadline. I had more than adequate time to draft ideas, construct sentences, revise them and edit structure with the aid of books from the library, the Internet, dictionaries and thesauruses.

Therefore, my rhetorical question is, “How can exam organisers expect examinees to construct a structurally well-edited 250-word text, enriched with valuable arguments and counterarguments, when only 40 minutes are provided without the availability of any dictionaries and thesauruses?”

Examinees are in such a rush to complete tasks that they are unable to consider all the aspects of the subject they are asked to analyse, let alone make a first draft about it.  Meanwhile, real life allows writers far better conditions to put their texts into shape.

Overall, the paradox is that IELTS is a language exam that most universities accept when it comes to admission, meanwhile, the exam is much more challenging than a university assessment task.

Although I have briefly mentioned a few arguments about watching videos with dictionaries, those did not refer to the assessment of listening skills explicitly.

One of the primary drawbacks of listening tasks during language exams is that completing them requires multitasking since examinees need to read the current task’s description, such as statements for a true or false task, and listening to the recording simultaneously. 

Furthermore, tasks require examinees to gain and jot down data from recordings after one or two play. (For example, phone numbers, names, dates and times, directions and email addresses.) However, most people cannot accomplish that even when using their first language. 

In real life, when dictating a phone number, we normally repeat it at least twice, usually separating them into smaller portions, then the other person reads what they put down on paper.

We have the opportunity to repeat what the other person said, or ask them to say it again. Listening tasks do not provide us with that privilege. Either you heard it and wrote down the first or second time, or you are doomed. No questions, no repetitions.

Speaking tasks during language exams are mostly relatable, most especially when the topics are aligned with the examinee’s personality as explained earlier. However, there are still occasions when situations feel forced.

For instance, without the sufficient amount of background information, examinees might find roleplays unnatural, which might prevent them from expressing themselves. In real life, when we talk to someone, we usually have all the details, however, in a simulated conversation, examinees need to fill in the gaps by using their imagination.

To sum up, language exams should be redesigned so that they reflect modern real life language use more than they do now. 

To achieve that, language exams should allow examinees to apply all the modern technological instruments available outside the language exam’s environment.

Furthermore, language exams should be more customised based on individuals’ personal passions.