IELTS Research Reports

A multiple case study of the relationship between the indicators of students’ English languagecompetence on entry and students’ academic progress at an international postgraduate universityThe data was analysed using MAXQDA software using deductive and inductive approaches. Theformer followed the line of questioning in the schedules; more inductive approaches led to theemergence of novel and unexpected themes within the data.8 FINDINGSThis section is divided into three parts based on themes that link the research literature to the data. Thefirst describes the different models of selection practices at Cranfield and the influence of the samplingcriteria upon them as appears in the data. The second concerns Course Directors’ knowledge and useof English test scores in the selection process and how these relate to other considerations in selectiondecisions. The final section deals with Course Directors’ views of NNES students’ academic andlinguistic progress and how these relate to programme structure, delivery and pedagogy. Subsidiarytopics and concerns recur across sections and are cross referenced as appropriate.8.1 Models of selection practicesThree models of selection practice, related to School affiliation, emerge from the data. Although thereare examples of Course Directors exerting autonomy in selection practices, the majority conform tothe model prevailing within their School. As there was only a single contributor from Cranfield Health,these data are not included in this section.The most distinctive of the Schools in developing a collective approach to the admission of NNESstudents is found in SOM for it has developed guidelines which extend the institutional regulations. Aswell as the IELTS score of 6.5, SOM demands a minimum sub-score on the writing component of IELTSof 6 and reserves the right to request an overall score of 550 and a writing analysis score of 4.0 on GMAT.The requirements apply regardless of whether the programme content favours text or number. SOM differsfrom the other Schools in admitting fewer EPP students (3 out of 127 in the programmes sampled) whoare subject to the same requirements as other students so the linguists’ involvement in selection is less thanelsewhere. The findings in the pilot study provide supporting evidence for the operation of the School’slanguage requirements. Nevertheless, six students with IELTS scores of 6 or less were admitted to Mastersprogrammes, conditional on satisfactory completion of the Summer Programme. Where a Course Directorwishes to offer a place to an applicant who scores below the required test score it is customary for him toseek the approval of the sub-Dean for academic performance or equivalent.The requirements express the SOM’s belief that it is preferable to filter out less linguistically ablestudents at entry in preference to devoting extra resources to the support of borderline students. Injustification, Course Directors stress the intensive and demanding character of Masters study andquestion whether spare time exists to devote to additional language study, a point that will be revisitedin Section 8.2. Extract 1 is typical of the SOM viewpoint:Extract 1“I think we have to screen them (borderline cases) out if we think they are not going tobe up to scratch in terms of language capability instead of admitting people with doubtfulcapabilities and trying to provide catch-up. It’s a distraction of time and resources. Weshouldn’t be doing that. We are not here to teach them English. They should have reacheda certain competence in English. If they’re marginal, we can provide some help but I don’tthink it should be institutionalised at all because that’s not what this programme is about.”SOM3 Course DirectorIELTS Research Reports Volume 11151