View in EDS

Testing Academic Language Proficiency: Comparing the TOEFL iBT® Test and the Duolingo English Test. TOEFL® Research Series. RR-104. ETS Research Report. RR-25-01

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Testing Academic Language Proficiency: Comparing the TOEFL iBT® Test and the Duolingo English Test. TOEFL® Research Series. RR-104. ETS Research Report. RR-25-01
Language: English
Authors: Sara T. Cushing
Source: ETS Research Report Series. Apr 2025.
Availability: ETS. Rosedale Road, Mailstop 19R, Princeton, NJ 08541. Tel: 609-921-9000; Fax: 609-734-5410; e-mail: RDweb@ets.org; Web site: https://www.ets.org/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 49
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Language Tests, English (Second Language), Second Language Learning, Academic Language, Language Proficiency, College Entrance Examinations, Test Content, Test Validity, Test Items, Cognitive Processes, Difficulty Level, Scoring, Listening, Reading, Writing (Composition), Speech
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Test of English as a Foreign Language
ISSN: 2330-8516
Abstract: This report provides an in-depth comparison of TOEFL iBT® and the Duolingo English Test (DET) in terms of the degree to which both tests assess academic language proficiency in listening, reading, writing, and speaking. The analysis is based on publicly available documentation on both tests, including sample test questions available on the test websites. For each skill area, the construct as defined by the test developer is discussed, followed by a review of the test content and the cognitive processes involved in completing items related to that skill. The results are evaluated against three propositions from the TOEFL® validity argument (Chapelle et al., 2008). The analysis suggests that although both tests provide evidence of general language proficiency, the input to test takers and the test items for TOEFL iBT are more academic in nature, both in terms of the content and the cognitive demands of the task. Some of the aspects of TOEFL iBT that make the test relatively more academic include extensive reading and listening passages and integrating information from multiple texts in speaking and writing. The report also highlights some of the ways in which a commitment to automated item generation and scoring limits the ability of a test like DET to fully represent the construct of academic language proficiency.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1487349
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1487349
    Name: ERIC Full Text
    Category: fullText
    Text: Full Text from ERIC
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1487349
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Testing Academic Language Proficiency: Comparing the TOEFL iBT® Test and the Duolingo English Test. TOEFL® Research Series. RR-104. ETS Research Report. RR-25-01
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sara+T%2E+Cushing%22">Sara T. Cushing</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22ETS+Research+Report+Series%22"><i>ETS Research Report Series</i></searchLink>. Apr 2025.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: ETS. Rosedale Road, Mailstop 19R, Princeton, NJ 08541. Tel: 609-921-9000; Fax: 609-734-5410; e-mail: RDweb@ets.org; Web site: https://www.ets.org/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 49
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Tests%22">Language Tests</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22English+%28Second+Language%29%22">English (Second Language)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Second+Language+Learning%22">Second Language Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Language%22">Academic Language</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Language+Proficiency%22">Language Proficiency</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Entrance+Examinations%22">College Entrance Examinations</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Content%22">Test Content</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Validity%22">Test Validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Items%22">Test Items</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Processes%22">Cognitive Processes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Difficulty+Level%22">Difficulty Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scoring%22">Scoring</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Listening%22">Listening</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading%22">Reading</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Writing+%28Composition%29%22">Writing (Composition)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Speech%22">Speech</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Test+of+English+as+a+Foreign+Language%22">Test of English as a Foreign Language</searchLink>
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 2330-8516
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This report provides an in-depth comparison of TOEFL iBT® and the Duolingo English Test (DET) in terms of the degree to which both tests assess academic language proficiency in listening, reading, writing, and speaking. The analysis is based on publicly available documentation on both tests, including sample test questions available on the test websites. For each skill area, the construct as defined by the test developer is discussed, followed by a review of the test content and the cognitive processes involved in completing items related to that skill. The results are evaluated against three propositions from the TOEFL® validity argument (Chapelle et al., 2008). The analysis suggests that although both tests provide evidence of general language proficiency, the input to test takers and the test items for TOEFL iBT are more academic in nature, both in terms of the content and the cognitive demands of the task. Some of the aspects of TOEFL iBT that make the test relatively more academic include extensive reading and listening passages and integrating information from multiple texts in speaking and writing. The report also highlights some of the ways in which a commitment to automated item generation and scoring limits the ability of a test like DET to fully represent the construct of academic language proficiency.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1487349
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1487349
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 49
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Language Tests
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: English (Second Language)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Second Language Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Language
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Language Proficiency
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Entrance Examinations
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Content
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Validity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Items
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Processes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Difficulty Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scoring
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Listening
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Writing (Composition)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Speech
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test of English as a Foreign Language
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Testing Academic Language Proficiency: Comparing the TOEFL iBT® Test and the Duolingo English Test. TOEFL® Research Series. RR-104. ETS Research Report. RR-25-01
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sara T. Cushing
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 04
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2330-8516
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: ETS Research Report Series
              Type: main
ResultId 1