INTRODUCTION

MISSION

SIGN UP

DATES

CANDIDATE REQUIREMENTS

GOALS

HISTORY

OVERVIEW

THE ORAL INTERVIEW

FINAL CODES

REFERENCES

THE APPEAL EXAM

PREPARING FOR THE APPEAL EXAM

TOEFL REQUIREMENTS

THE INDIANA ENGLISH PROFICIENCY EXAM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Explanation of the Codes Used in the Final Evaluation of the TEPAIC and the Appeal Exam

When the candidates complete the oral test, they must receive one of the three passing ranks for both the Oral Interview in order to be certified for teaching. If they receive a failing rank for the Oral Interview, their English will not be “certified” for the purpose of “engaging in the direct instruction of undergraduate students.”

Since cases of “borderline” passes inevitably occur (“C3” below), and since decisions about cases near the cut-score are less reliable than decisions for cases far from the cut-score (i.e., clear passes or clear failures—for example, see “C1” and “C2” below.), the degree of certainty of the raters’ decisions is explicitly reflected in score reports that specify the degree of pass for successful candidates. This procedure serves a function similar to that of “confidence intervals” for standardized tests with fixed-response formats. The final ranking codes are given below.

Explanations of the Final Ranking Codes Sent to Departments

Certified Levels
C1 (Certification level 1 – Outstanding Certification). C1 candidates have achieved outstanding results in the oral interview. If these candidates are hired, we predict, based on their exam results, that English will not be a problem in the classroom nor will it hinder communication of ideas between instructor and students.

C2 (Certification level 2 – Satisfactory Certification). C2 candidates have received satisfactory results on the exam. If these candidates are hired, we predict, based on their exam results, that English will not be a problem in the classroom nor will it hinder communication of ideas between instructor and students.

C3 (Certification level 3 – Adequate Certification). C3 Candidates have passed the exam with minimal/marginal scores. We predict that if these candidates are hired, there may be complaints from students. We suggest that the AI’s classes be carefully supervised by a faculty member who can monitor student response and be responsible for guiding the instructor during the course. The candidate’s English proficiency level might occasionally hinder communication with students, especially if the students are unwilling or unable to extend themselves to try to understand their instructor.

In some of these “borderline” cases, it is possible that the candidates would pass the exam one time, but not the next time. As with any exam, “borderline” results may vary somewhat from one administration to the next.

Non-Certified Levels
NC4 (Not Certified). Candidates who receive a score of “NC4” do not yet have an English proficiency level high enough for “the direct instruction of undergraduate students.” These candidates are not qualified to teach, lead classroom discussions or issue course grades. They may, however, with a waiver from the Dean of Faculties, be hired to assist a faculty member by performing such tasks as answering individual student questions in a lab where a faculty member is present, passing out papers in large lecture sections, helping to correct and evaluate tests, and conducting some tutorials and one-on-one meetings with students outside of the classroom setting.

NC5 (Not Certified) Candidates who receive a score of “NC5” are not certified to engage in any phase of instruction.

These results are sent as soon as possible to the Graduate School and the Dean of the Faculties and the department which has supported the candidate by sending a memo of intent to hire.

 

Last updated: 12 December 2013
Comments to: dsls@indiana.edu
Copyright 2001, the Trustees of Indiana Universit
y