Presenter Bios

First-year TESOL Doctoral students at

the University of Central Florida.

Alison Youngblood has taught ESP,

EAP, and K-12 in Japan and South Korea

Melanie Gonzalez has taught EAP and

K-12 in Florida

Theoretical Framework

The iBT speaking section is met with unfavorable attitudes by test-takers from across the globe (Stricker & Atali, 2010)

Researchers also observed this negative attitude while teaching in an EAP

Class project to analyze data sets via statistical analyses

Our SampleBased on ETS’s 2009 Score ReportLooked at the average composite score and average section score on the iBT and PBT listed by country

Sample included scores from countries where both iBT and PBT were reported by ETS

n=144

Methodology

Researchers believe it is logical to assume that composite scores include individual test takers’ multiple attempts

Statistical procedures used: 1. Dependent t-test 2. Repeated measures

ANOVA

Research Question 1

Is there a significant difference in the mean composite scores for iBT and PBT?

ResultsThe test was statistically significant t(143)=-2.65, p<.05. There is a significant difference in mean composite iBT scores (M=551.79, sd=25.87) and mean composite PBT scores (M=545.67, sd=38.05). The 95% confidence interval for the mean difference is -10.69 to -1.55.

*In order to make comparison, iBT composite scores were converted to the PBT scale using ETS’ score conversion chart.

DiscussionOur results indicate that students on average actually score higher on the iBT

This challenges student perceptions that the iBT is ‘harder’

However, the converted mean composite of 551.79 on the iBT is still not high enough to meet the admission requirements for many U.S. universities

Even though the test showed significance, our effect size was calculated by eta squared and found to be .046. This means only 5% of the variance in composite scores can be attributed to test version

Difficult to make exact comparisons based on composite scores because of differences in test version (ETS, 2005).

Research Question 2Do students score significantly lower on the speaking section of the iBT in comparison to the other three sections?

ResultsThere is a statistically significant difference in section score ( p<.05) on the iBT sections (F3, 429=95.21). 40% of the variance in score can be accounted for by section.

DiscussionThe speaking section had the highest mean composite score (m=21, sd=1.99).

The reading section had the lowest mean composite score(m=18.80, sd= 3.28)

The is the opposite of student perceptions

LimitationsSmall sample sizeUse of mean composite scores instead of individual scores

Unable to determine the number of individuals who took the test multiple times versus the individuals who only attempted the test once in 2009

Further ResearchStudies exist that compare the CBT and PBT, but unable to find studies that compare the PBT to iBT

Direct research comparing the iBT to PBT could be helpful

Obtain individual scores

ReferencesEducational Testing Service (2010). Test and

score data summary for TOEFL internet-based and paper-based tests. January 2009-December 2009 Test Data. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/71943_web.pdf

Educational Testing Service (2005). Score Comparison Tables.TOEFL Internet-based Test. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/TOEFL/pdf/TOEFL_iBT_Score_Comparison_Tables.pdf

Stricker, L.J., & Attali, Y. (2010). Test taker’s attitudes about the TOEFL iBT. TOEFL iBT Research Report January 2010, 1-24. Retrieved from http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-10-02.pdf