The EF English Proficiency Index and English in Ecuador
Uncertain assumptions of the international ranking
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32719/26312816.2022.5.2.11Keywords:
English, language proficiency, international assessments, EcuadorAbstract
Ecuador’s abysmal level of English according to the EF English Proficiency Index has become a habitual reference point when discussing English learning in Ecuador. This essay questions three assumptions implied by this international ranking: that it represents Ecuador’s language proficiency; that it offers a meaningful comparison between countries; and that concern for language proficiency is equivalent to concern for equity. Inspired by critical studies of international large-scale assessments, the principle that quantitative data is not neutral, and the concept that the index represents a discourse, I argue that this index is not as objective or trustworthy as it may appear and that the authority it is granted is worrisome for Ecuadorian education.
Downloads
References
Addey, C., & Sellar, S. (2018). Why Do Countries Participate in PISA? Understanding the Role of International Large-Scale Assessments in Global Education Policy. En A. Verger, M. Novelli y H. Altinyelten (eds.), Global Education Policy and International Development: New Agendas, Issues, and Policies (pp. 97-117). Bloomsbury. https://bit.ly/3xibvcG
Argudo, J., Fajardo, T., Abad, M., & Cabrera, H. (2021). Students’ Perceptions on Their EFL Teacher Efficacy: A Study on EFL Teachers’ Language Proficiency and Their Self-Efficacy. MEXTESOL Journal, 45 (1), 1-12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1289151.pdf
Ball, S. J. (2012). Global Education Inc.: New policy networks and the neoliberal imaginary. Routledge.
Bray, M., Kobakhidze, M. N., & Suter, L. E. (2020). The challenges of measuring outside-school-time educational activities: Experiences and lessons from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Comparative Education Review, 64(1), 87–106. https://doi.org/10.1086/706776
Cajas, D. (2017). Characterising the Challenges and Responses of Ecuadorian Universities to Recent EFL Language Policy Changes: A Mixed Methods Study [tesis doctoral]. University of Warwick, Reino Unido. http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/103475/1/WRAP_Theses_Cajas_2017.pdf
Cardona, D., Pruyn, M., & Barnes, M. (2021). Colombian National Bilingual Plan: A Vehicle for Equity or an Instrument for Accountability? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2021.1980574
Cardoso, M. (2020). Policy Evidence by Design: International Large-Scale Assessments and Grade Repetition. Comparative Education Review, 64 (4), 598-618. https://doi.org/10.1086/710777
Castillo, L. (2021, 27 de noviembre). Ecuador mantiene un bajo nivel de dominio del idioma inglés. El Comercio. https://www.elcomercio.com/tendencias/sociedad/ecuador-idioma-dominio-ingles-estudiantes.html
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education. Routledge. https://bit.ly/3xgX8VZ
Consejo de Europa. (2021). Marco común europeo de referencia para las lenguas: Aprendizaje, enseñanza, evaluación. Volumen complementario. Consejo de Europa. https://rm.coe.int/marco-comun-europeo-de-referencia-para-las-lenguas-aprendizaje-ensenan/1680a52d53
Cronquist, K., & Fiszbein, A. (2017). English Language Learning in Latin America. The Dialogue. https://www.thedialogue.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/English-Language-Learning-in-Latin-America-Final-1.pdf
EF (2011). EF English Proficiency Index 2011. EF. https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/downloads/
EF (2012). EF English Proficiency Index 2012. EF. https://bit.ly/3xk2wI2
EF (2013). EF English Proficiency Index 2013. EF. https://bit.ly/3QC9mzk
EF (2014). EF English Proficiency Index 2014. EF. https://bit.ly/3xjrkQd
EF (2015). EF English Proficiency Index 2015. EF. https://bit.ly/3BzlvRd
EF (2016). EF English Proficiency Index 2016. EF. https://bit.ly/3DhmLJY
EF (2017). EF English Proficiency Index 2017. EF. https://bit.ly/3Bz2Vsp
EF (2018). EF English Proficiency Index 2018. EF. https://bit.ly/3QD85Ib
EF (2019). EF English Proficiency Index 2019. EF. https://bit.ly/3S1BSeV
EF (2020). EF English Proficiency Index 2020. EF. https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/downloads/
EF (2021a). Company Fact Sheet 2021. https://bit.ly/3S1FjlT
EF (2021b). EF English Proficiency Index 2021. EF. https://bit.ly/3LmOPxT
EF (2022). EF EPI 2021-EF English Proficiency Index: Sobre el índice. https://www.ef.com.ec/epi/about-epi
El Universo. (2019, 30 de diciembre). Ecuador, peor país de Latinoamérica en dominio de inglés, según informe. El Universo. https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2019/12/30/nota/7671231/ecuador-peor-pais-latinoamerica-dominio-ingles-segun-informe/
El Universo. (2020, 26 de noviembre). Ecuador, el peor país de la región en dominio del idioma inglés, según análisis; educadores dan sus observaciones. El Universo. https://www.eluniverso.com/noticias/2020/11/25/nota/8061691/ingles-educacion-ecuador-ranking-ef-peor-ubicado-latinoamerica/
ETS. (2013). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. http://www.toefl.com.tw/iBT/pdf/2013_TOEFL%20Test%20and%20Score%20Data%20Summary%E2%80%8B.pdf
ETS. (2014). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsds_data_2013.pdf
ETS. (2015). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. https://bit.ly/3fBSfB1
ETS. (2016). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsda_data_2015.pdf
ETS. (2017). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsds_data_2016.pdf
ETS. (2018). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsds_data_2017.pdf
ETS. (2019). Test and Score Data Summary for TOEFL iBT® Tests. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsds_data_2018.pdf
ETS. (2020). TOEFL iBT®Test and Score Data Summary 2019. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsds_data_2019.pdf
ETS. (2021). TOEFL iBT®Test and Score Data Summary 2020. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/toefl_tsds_data_2020.pdf
ETS. (2022a). About ETS. https://www.ets.org/about
ETS. (2022b). ETS Research: Data Requests. https://www.ets.org/research/contact/data_requests
ETS. (2022c). Interpreting TOEFL ITP Scores. https://www.ets.org/toefl_itp/scoring/interpret
ETS. (2022d). Setting Score Requirements. https://www.ets.org/s/toefl-essentials/score-users/scores-admissions/set
Fleckenstein, J., Keller, S., Krüger, M., Tannenbaum, R. J., & Köller, O. (2020). Linking TOEFL iBT Writing Rubrics to CEFR Levels: Cut Scores and Validity Evidence from a Standard Setting Study. Assessing Writing, 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100420
Gillborn, D., Warmington, P., & Demack, S. (2018). QuantCrit: Education, Policy, “Big Data” and Principles for a Critical Race Theory of Statistics. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21 (2), 158-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377417
Grek, S. (2009). Governing by Numbers: The PISA “Effect” in Europe. Journal of Education Policy, 24 (1), 23-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930802412669
Grin, F. (2001). English as Economic Value: Facts and Fallacies. World Englishes, 20 (1), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00196
Harsch, C., Ushioda, E., & Ladroue, C. (2017). Investigating the Predictive Validity of TOEFL iBT Test Scores and Their Use in Informing Policy in a United Kingdom University Setting. ETS Research Report Series, 2017 (1), 1-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12167
Hernández, J., & Rojas, J. (eds.). (2018). English Public Policies in Latin America: Looking for Innovation and Systemic Improvement in Quality English Language Teaching. British Council. https://bit.ly/3L9kmTJ
IELTS Partners. (2022). Demographic data 2021. https://www.ielts.org/for-researchers/test-statistics/demographic-data#
INEVAL (2018). Educación en Ecuador: Resultados de PISA para el Desarrollo. INEVAL. https://bit.ly/3L8VT0X
Kubota, R. (2011). Questioning Linguistic Instrumentalism: English, Neoliberalism, and Language Tests in Japan. Linguistics and Education, 22 (3), 248-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2011.02.002
Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & McNamara, D. (2016). Construct Validity in TOEFL iBT Speaking Tasks: Insights from Natural Language Processing. Language Testing, 33 (3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532215587391
Macías, K., & Villafuerte, J. (2020). Teaching English Language in Ecuador: A Review from the Inclusive Educational Approach. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 9 (2), 75-90. https://bit.ly/3QD9UF1
Mackenzie, L. (2022). Linguistic Imperialism, English, and Development: Implications for Colombia. Current Issues in Language Planning, 23 (2), 137-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2021.1939977
McCormick, C. (2013, 15 de noviembre). Countries with Better English Have Better Economies. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2013/11/countries-with-better-english-have-better-economies
Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador (2016). Introduction: English as a Foreign Language. Ministerio de Educación del Ecuador. https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2016/03/EFL1.pdf
Municipio de Quito (2019, 19 de noviembre). Más de 5000 estudiantes municipales serán evaluados en su nivel de inglés. Quito Informa. http://www.quitoinforma.gob.ec/2019/11/07/mas-de-5000-estudiantes-municipales-seran-evaluados-en-su-nivel-de-ingles
Orosz, A., Monzón, M., & Velasco, P. (2021). Ecuadorian Teachers’ Perceptions of Teaching English: Challenges in the Public Education Sector. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20 (3), 229-249. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.3.14
Pizmony-Levy, O., & Bjorklund, P. (2018). International Assessments of Student Achievement and Public Confidence in Education: Evidence from a Cross-National Study. Oxford Review of Education, 44 (2), 239-257. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1389714
Robertson, S., & Verger, A. (2012). Governing Education through Public Private Partnerships. En S. Robertson, K. Mundy, A. Verger y F. Menashy (eds.), Public Private Partnerships in Education: New Actors and Modes of Governance in a Globalizing World (pp. 21-41). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://bit.ly/3QAIAHp
Schuelka, M. (2013). Excluding Students with Disabilities from the Culture of Achievement: The Case of the TIMSS, PIRLS, and PISA. Journal of Education Policy, 28 (2), 216-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2012.708789
Sevy-Biloon, J., Recino, U., & Muñoz, C. (2020). Factors Affecting English Language Teaching in Public Schools in Ecuador. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19 (3), 276-294. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.3.15
Tonini, D. (2021). Human Capital Theory in Comparative and International Education: Development, Application, and Problematics. En T. Jules, R. Shields y M. Thomas (eds.), The Bloomsbury Handbook of Theory in Comparative and International Education (pp. 69-86). Bloomsbury. https://bit.ly/3U2WZiH
Zakharia, Z., & Menashy, F. (2020). The Emerging Role of Corporate Actors as Policymakers in Education in Emergencies: Evidence from the Syria Refugee Crisis. Journal on Education in Emergencies, 5 (2), 40-70. https://doi.org/10.33682/pcbg-2fu2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Adeline De Angelis
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
![](<img src="https://www.scilit.net/images/scilitLogo_black.png" width="200" alt="Scilit logo" />)
![](<img src="https://www.scilit.net/images/scilitLogo_white.png" width="200" alt="Scilit logo" />)
