ICAO Language Proficiency Tests
Take me downwind
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FCO
Age: 54
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello all,
Thanks to those of you who did the survey. To answer PPRUNE Towers the question is related to the ICAO Rating Scale. If something were to happen frequently, how would you label it as a percentage? My objective is to do a survey on what these frequency adverbs and other subjective factors in the rating scale actually mean to different people.
An example: as of the results now the word "frequently" means
40% of the time to a couple of people;
50% of the time to one person surveyed;
60% of the time to 4 people;
70% of the time to 2 other people;
80% of the time to yet 4 different surveyed people and
to one person it means 100%.
The rating scale is subjective, every Member State has interpreted this Standard in their own way and until now only few have really taken it seriously yet miscommunications still seem to be a relevant issue in Human Factors in Aviation.
Some States have decided that language people and/or Operational professionals can be examiners yet few seem to be really sure of how to use the scale or worse have hired outside companies' tests to do so and those tests are unable to the job.
Think of it as if TREs or ATC examiners had to start using a subjective scale to rate their peers. On a line check a pilot has to say "FO Smith sometimes uses 'heavy' with the callsign" or "almost never forgets to lower the landing gear". What about if you had to report "ATC Joe frequently fails to remind altimeter settings to pilots descending from FL to ALT". How can this be a judicial answer?
My survey is only to prove that we are all human so adverbs of frequency and vague descriptors are not to be used for judging performance in a GO/NO GO situation. These people's livelihoods are on the line and it's a fallible system.
On another rant: I am all together against the testing aspect of this standard. I am all for required number of hours of effective communications training in English by people learned in this arena. For those operational personnel who are not at a proficiency level that allows such training then remedial training in English as a second/foreign language should be mandatory. Native speakers of English should undergo communications training (especially monolingual speakers of English). Lastly, fines and penalties should be issued to those who do not use R/T phraseologies properly.
My very non-academic survey and public ranting will not get any such standard changed but through various channels I am trying to get the Aviation Public aware that you are about to be tested by people who think differently on almost every (pardon the pun) aspect of the rating scale and are subject to emotions and one's rating reflects these facts. Your tester could very well think that almost never means 100% or 50%-do you want the latter to judge your proficiency?
We as raters should be calibrated periodically and most have a percentage of their ratings re-rated by a peer for quality control but this is not enough. Tests out there being used right now are performed by people who have been trained poorly and this will have a great washback effect on their candidates and the rest of the aviation world. No one seems to care, but then you speak of the Koreans who seem to have passed their test yet they still are unable to communicate in English.
I am reading "Flight Discipline" by Tony Kern and he states
Communication problems can not be labelled "foreign pilots in American airspace". Recently three native English speaking pilots and two native speaking ATC's somehow miscommunicated enough to let an airplane land at the wrong airport. Now all anyone cares about is getting a certificate. Does anyone out there really care about communicating effectively for safety?
Thanks again for those of you who did the survey and I hope that more of you will follow.
Best,
PE
Thanks to those of you who did the survey. To answer PPRUNE Towers the question is related to the ICAO Rating Scale. If something were to happen frequently, how would you label it as a percentage? My objective is to do a survey on what these frequency adverbs and other subjective factors in the rating scale actually mean to different people.
An example: as of the results now the word "frequently" means
40% of the time to a couple of people;
50% of the time to one person surveyed;
60% of the time to 4 people;
70% of the time to 2 other people;
80% of the time to yet 4 different surveyed people and
to one person it means 100%.
The rating scale is subjective, every Member State has interpreted this Standard in their own way and until now only few have really taken it seriously yet miscommunications still seem to be a relevant issue in Human Factors in Aviation.
Some States have decided that language people and/or Operational professionals can be examiners yet few seem to be really sure of how to use the scale or worse have hired outside companies' tests to do so and those tests are unable to the job.
Think of it as if TREs or ATC examiners had to start using a subjective scale to rate their peers. On a line check a pilot has to say "FO Smith sometimes uses 'heavy' with the callsign" or "almost never forgets to lower the landing gear". What about if you had to report "ATC Joe frequently fails to remind altimeter settings to pilots descending from FL to ALT". How can this be a judicial answer?
My survey is only to prove that we are all human so adverbs of frequency and vague descriptors are not to be used for judging performance in a GO/NO GO situation. These people's livelihoods are on the line and it's a fallible system.
On another rant: I am all together against the testing aspect of this standard. I am all for required number of hours of effective communications training in English by people learned in this arena. For those operational personnel who are not at a proficiency level that allows such training then remedial training in English as a second/foreign language should be mandatory. Native speakers of English should undergo communications training (especially monolingual speakers of English). Lastly, fines and penalties should be issued to those who do not use R/T phraseologies properly.
My very non-academic survey and public ranting will not get any such standard changed but through various channels I am trying to get the Aviation Public aware that you are about to be tested by people who think differently on almost every (pardon the pun) aspect of the rating scale and are subject to emotions and one's rating reflects these facts. Your tester could very well think that almost never means 100% or 50%-do you want the latter to judge your proficiency?
We as raters should be calibrated periodically and most have a percentage of their ratings re-rated by a peer for quality control but this is not enough. Tests out there being used right now are performed by people who have been trained poorly and this will have a great washback effect on their candidates and the rest of the aviation world. No one seems to care, but then you speak of the Koreans who seem to have passed their test yet they still are unable to communicate in English.
I am reading "Flight Discipline" by Tony Kern and he states
"Communications: ...but aviators generally believe themselves to be excellent communicators-and therein lies our challenge. How can we improve our communications when we ourselves don't think there is a problem?"
Thanks again for those of you who did the survey and I hope that more of you will follow.
Best,
PE
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but...
Why not put that test into grammatical English? I did it but I found that it was written in pretty poor English, so that most of the questions didn't make much sense to me. (I am not a linguist but I am a native speaker of American English and I also learned British English from working with Brits in a British company.)
The example cited in #322, above, has obvious errors in both grammar and spelling and it is not alone!
You probably know about the idea that a tester can only test up to his own standard, so that getting a test of English comprehension written in incorrect English makes for a certain amount of skepticism!
For now my UK licence simply reads, "Remarks: Language Proficiency: English". It will be interesting to see how they plan to move on from that, especially defining the standards for Levels 4, 5 & 6. I pay much closer attention to the Queen's Speech nowadays.
The example cited in #322, above, has obvious errors in both grammar and spelling and it is not alone!
You probably know about the idea that a tester can only test up to his own standard, so that getting a test of English comprehension written in incorrect English makes for a certain amount of skepticism!
For now my UK licence simply reads, "Remarks: Language Proficiency: English". It will be interesting to see how they plan to move on from that, especially defining the standards for Levels 4, 5 & 6. I pay much closer attention to the Queen's Speech nowadays.
Last edited by chuks; 2nd Jun 2008 at 16:22.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Qatar
Age: 71
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
english level 6 for nationals
French ,most French pass with a level 6 in France and Americans also do get level 6. UAEmirates pilots too. Chinese pilots and Thai controllers are considered experts in English by their caa. I have seen and heard non native english speaking pilots who deserve the highest mark because of their high standard r/t.but managed 4 only. An english pilot who gets 5 because he works in France ! It is time to raise our voices because this is not working. I have been flying all over the world and i promess i try so hard but still find difficulties with the south African accent controllers who speak fast and give u multiple clearances.
By the way , Thanks to the Netherland caa for the latter to ICAO. 
By the way , Thanks to the Netherland caa for the latter to ICAO.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: fort Worth, TX, USA
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
English Language Proficiency
You guys most likely know already about this but the FAA requires now "English Proficiency": You'll have to have reissued your FAA certificates (licenses) which then will show that you are proficient in English.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Laos,Kenya,Czech republic,IOM , Eire , France,CAR,Libya...etc..
Age: 50
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as the FAA mentionned , the requirements for english proficiency (CPL) or fluency (ATP) were already enshrined in the FAR's . But in order to make it obvious for international pilots , they are now reissuing the certificates for those who ask (2USd) . Anyone getting a new certificate will automatically have "english proficiency '' endorsed . FAA.gov for more infos .
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
zizilapop, the "managed 4 only" could be that they were given a certificate without an exam, yet already have an English radio licence. The certificate qualifies automatically for level 4 until the exam is done, latest in 3 years. After the exam, then a 5 or 6 is possible.
For example, I am a native English speaker, but exams are not yet available in Germany so, having an English radio licence, I automatically get only a level 4 along with my German peers.
I just wonder about some of those people NOT passing even level 4 in 3 years.... what then? Do they suddenly lose their priviledges to fly internationally? I mean, some really CAN'T speak good English and should never have gotten the English radio licence to begin with!
Westy
For example, I am a native English speaker, but exams are not yet available in Germany so, having an English radio licence, I automatically get only a level 4 along with my German peers.
I just wonder about some of those people NOT passing even level 4 in 3 years.... what then? Do they suddenly lose their priviledges to fly internationally? I mean, some really CAN'T speak good English and should never have gotten the English radio licence to begin with!
Westy
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brasil
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Westy
I can tell you that the position of ANAC here is that any pilot who fails the retest in three years will lose the right to fly international routes. However, three years is a long time and things can change, especially if it's going to hurt the airlines. My very personal opinion is that pilots will keep Level 4, even if their performance next time round merits a lower rating.
On a related point I am amazed at some of the results of the tests here. On the whole I would say that the ANAC test is fair, and the results seem to reflect the actual level of English demonstrated by the candidates, however there have been a few results that simply boggle the mind
I suspect that the comment above about the result depending more on examination technique than actual language skills might be close to the truth.
Maybe the ICAO audit next year will shed some light on this.
TTFN
I can tell you that the position of ANAC here is that any pilot who fails the retest in three years will lose the right to fly international routes. However, three years is a long time and things can change, especially if it's going to hurt the airlines. My very personal opinion is that pilots will keep Level 4, even if their performance next time round merits a lower rating.
On a related point I am amazed at some of the results of the tests here. On the whole I would say that the ANAC test is fair, and the results seem to reflect the actual level of English demonstrated by the candidates, however there have been a few results that simply boggle the mind
I suspect that the comment above about the result depending more on examination technique than actual language skills might be close to the truth.Maybe the ICAO audit next year will shed some light on this.
TTFN
That's Life!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Out of the sand pit, carving a path through our jungle.
Age: 72
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been 'awarded' a level 4 of EP. As I reside in Ireland the TRE on my next LPC/OPC will not be able to 'upgrade' my level as he is not a 'recognised English Speaker'! WTF is going on!
I have 'O' level grades (old style) in English Language, English Literature and a Distinction in English Oral, but this counts for nothing with ICAO, I still have to pass the tests!
I have 'O' level grades (old style) in English Language, English Literature and a Distinction in English Oral, but this counts for nothing with ICAO, I still have to pass the tests!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could someone please let me know where I could do a Level 6 English exam in the uk ?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a letter from my FTO that states I have successfully met the requirements for JAR-FCL 1.200. Does this mean I still have to do a test for ICAO language proficiency ?
Cheers
Cheers
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 70
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mis-communication
I believe you have nailed the underlying issue. Everyone in the aviation chain is "qualified" and "competent" in ICAO radio communication phraseology. However, it is when you need to communicate "outside the box" that the real problem starts. In many countries, ATC and pilots can ONLY communicate using ICAO radio phraseology. But, if for operational reasons you need to communicate other or additional info, they loose it. And this would invariably be at the time when additional info is urgently required by aircrew. Therefore, English communication competency must be at a broader operational level, but the current proficiency tests do not ensure that level.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: The wx is here, I wish u were beautiful
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
