Each year, multiple versions of each of the
six IELTS components (Listening, Academic Reading, General
Training Reading, Academic Writing, General Training Writing, and
Speaking) are released for use by centres testing IELTS candidates.
Reliability estimates for the objectively and subjectively scored
modules used in 2011 are reported below.
Reliability of
objectively-scored components (Reading and
Listening)
The reliability of Listening and Reading tests
is reported using Cronbach's alpha, a reliability estimate which
measures the internal consistency of the 40-item test. The
following Listening and Reading material released in 2011 had
sufficient candidate responses to estimate and report meaningful
reliability values as follows:
|
Component
|
|
Alpha
|
|
Listening version
|
535
|
0.90
|
|
Listening version
|
536
|
0.90
|
|
Listening version
|
537
|
0.92
|
|
Listening version
|
538
|
0.89
|
|
Listening version
|
539
|
0.91
|
|
Listening version
|
540
|
0.91
|
|
Listening version
|
541
|
0.92
|
|
Listening version
|
542
|
0.91
|
|
Listening version
|
543
|
0.89
|
|
Listening version
|
544
|
0.89
|
|
Listening version
|
545
|
0.92
|
|
Listening version
|
546
|
0.89
|
|
Listening version
|
547
|
0.89
|
|
Listening version
|
548
|
0.91
|
|
Listening version
|
549
|
0.93
|
|
Listening version
|
550
|
0.92
|
|
Average Alpha across
versions
|
|
0.91
|
|
Component
|
|
Alpha
|
|
General Training reading version
|
401
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
402
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
403
|
0.91
|
|
General Training reading version
|
404
|
0.90
|
|
General Training reading version
|
405
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
406
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
407
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
408
|
0.93
|
|
General Training reading version
|
409
|
0.94
|
|
General Training reading version
|
410
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
411
|
0.94
|
|
General Training reading version
|
412
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
413
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
414
|
0.92
|
|
General Training reading version
|
415
|
0.91
|
|
General Training reading version
|
416
|
0.94
|
|
Average Alpha across
versions
|
|
0.92
|
|
Component
|
|
Alpha
|
|
Academic reading version
|
535
|
0.93
|
|
Academic reading version
|
536
|
0.88
|
|
Academic reading version
|
537
|
0.90
|
|
Academic reading version
|
538
|
0.88
|
|
Academic reading version
|
539
|
0.89
|
|
Academic reading version
|
540
|
0.89
|
|
Academic reading version
|
541
|
0.91
|
|
Academic reading version
|
542
|
0.90
|
|
Academic reading version
|
543
|
0.90
|
|
Academic reading version
|
544
|
0.89
|
|
Academic reading version
|
545
|
0.91
|
|
Academic reading version
|
546
|
0.91
|
|
Academic reading version
|
547
|
0.91
|
|
Academic reading version
|
548
|
0.90
|
|
Academic reading version
|
549
|
0.89
|
|
Academic reading version
|
550
|
0.89
|
|
Average Alpha across
versions
|
|
0.90
|
The figures reported for Listening and Reading
modules indicate the expected levels of reliability for tests
containing 40 items. On the basis of these reliability figures, an
estimate of the standard error of measurement (SEM) may be
calculated for these modules using the following formula:

st is the standard deviation of the
test
rxx' is the reliability of the
test
Table 1 Mean, standard deviation and standard
error of measurement of Listening and Reading (2011)
|
|
Mean
|
St deviation
|
SEM
|
|
Listening
|
6.1
|
1.3
|
0.390
|
|
Academic Reading
|
5.9
|
1.2
|
0.379
|
|
General Training Reading
|
5.7
|
1.5
|
0.424
|
The SEM should be interpreted in terms of the final band scores
reported for Listening and Reading components(which are reported in
half-bands).
Reliability of subjectively-scored components (Writing
and Speaking)
The reliability of the Writing and Speaking
components cannot be reported in the same manner as for
Reading/Listening because they are not item-based; candidates'
writing and speaking performances are rated by trained and
standardised examiners according to detailed descriptive criteria
and rating scales. The assessment criteria used for rating Writing
and Speaking performance are described in the IELTS 2006
Handbook.
Benchmarked example writing performances and CD-based speaking
performances at different levels can be found, along with examiner
comments, in the IELTS official practice materials which can be
ordered from the IELTS website. User-oriented band descriptors
describing levels of Writing and Speaking performance are also
available on the website. In addition, the “IELTS Scores Explained”
DVD provides information specifically tailored to organizations
wanting a detailed description of IELTS scores. This information
helps in setting appropriate standards of English proficiency.
Click here for more information.
Reliability of rating is assured through the face-to-face
training and certification of examiners and all must undergo a
retraining and recertification process every two years. A
Professional Support Network (PSN) manages and standardizes the
examiner cadre, including face to face examiner monitoring as well
as distance monitoring (using recordings of the Speaking tests). A
‘jagged profile’ system maintains a further check on the global
reliability of IELTS performance assessment. Routine targeted
double marking identifies the level of divergence (i.e., jagged
profile) between Writing and/or Speaking scores and Reading and
Listening scores. This process allows for the identification of
possible misclassified candidates. The jagged profile system is
also combined with ‘Targeted sample monitoring’ to further identify
possible faulty ratings by examiners. Selected centres worldwide
are required to provide a sample of examiners' marked tapes and
scripts. Tapes and scripts are then second-marked by a team of
IELTS Principal Examiners and assistant Principal Examiners.
Principal Examiners monitor for quality of both test conduct and
rating, and feedback is returned to each test centre. The outcomes
that emerge from these reliability measures feed back into examiner
retraining and continually build on quality management and
assurance systems for IELTS.
Experimental generalisability studies were carried out as part
of the IELTS Speaking and Writing Revision Projects to investigate
the reliability of ratings (Shaw, 2004; Taylor & Jones, 2001).
More recent G-studies based on examiner certification data showed
coefficients of 0.83-0.86 for Speaking and 0.81-0.89 for
Writing.
The IELTS exam contains four components upon which an overall
band score is awarded. Thus an estimate of composite reliability
offers a useful measure for overall test reliability. Following
Feldt & Brennan (1989), composite reliability estimates were
calculated based on test data from 2009. To generate an
appropriately cautious estimate, minimum alpha values were used for
the objectively marked papers, and G-coefficients for the single
rater condition on subjectively marked scores. The composite
reliability estimate for the Academic module was 0.96 and produced
a composite SEM of 0.22. For General Training, the composite
reliability was 0.96 with a SEM of 0.23. If average rather than
minimum values are used for the objective paper alphas, composite
reliability becomes 0.96 for both versions.
References
Feldt, LS & Brennan, RL (1989) Reliability. In
RL Linn (Ed), Educational measurement (3rd ed, 105-146). New York:
Macmillan.
Shaw, SD (2004) IELTS writing: revising assessment criteria and
scales (Phase 3). Research Notes 16, 3-7.
Taylor, L & Jones, N (2001) Revising the IELTS Speaking Test.
Research Notes 4, 9-12.