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 overall concern about writing skills raises another question which is whether entry requirementsshould be higher for postgraduate courses in general, however it is assessed. Certainly, the majorityview of these Course Directors is that the intensity of Masters study is such that there is little, if any,capacity for students to devote time and effort to anything other than academic activities. The resultsfollowing the progress of Summer Programme students would support this view. Whilst some UKHEIs require higher English test scores for postgraduate than for undergraduate study this is notnecessarily standard practice. The experience of Course Director SOE1 who had raised the entryrequirement for his course is, however, not encouraging in this regard.More positively, there was a reassuring consensus that students’ oral skills were adequate for Mastersstudy. To what extent this finding is particular to the context is a matter of speculation and furtherresearch will be required in contrasting settings to determine the answer. The relatively randomnature of student diversity, the rural location of the campus and the prominence of group work,accompanying teamwork and interaction are all features that would encourage the development of oralskills. Where these are absent, or less prominent, the findings may differ. Another topic of agreementamongst all interviewees was the importance of immersion in the English language and culture ofUK higher education, although this was not necessarily within a Course Director’s control. Despitethis, the degree to which a student might engage with host language and culture was yet anotherconsideration for inclusion in selection decisions.10.2 The relationship between Summer Programme students’ entry assessmentsand subsequent linguistic and academic progressWhilst the varied selection practices within the institution produced rich data for analysis in the pilotand interview studies, it confounded intentions to compare students’ entry test scores with subsequentacademic trajectories and outcomes because of small student numbers. In addition, excluding NNESstudents without formal English entry test scores the variations would have resulted in the exclusionof several MSc programmes from the study so seriously limiting its scope.The alternative option, which focused on the progress of the Summer Programme students, examinedthe progress of students identified as borderline in terms of English language skills. The resultsdemonstrate that the group as a whole remained so throughout their degree studies, although the finaldegree results are unavailable at the time of writing. So far, nine out of 24 students have gained theirMasters degrees, 14 have been instructed to revise and represent their theses and one student hasfailed to gain a MSc degree but may gain a PGDiploma, subject to passing an exam. Typically, around10% of Summer Programme students do not gain MSc degrees so, provided all students pass theirresubmitted theses, the pass rate is higher than anticipated.These results show similarities with Banerjee’s study (2005) of students who were considered to be‘at risk’ by their Admissions Tutors on account of English language proficiency. In the Lancaster study,data were collected from eight ‘at risk’ students which showed that they suffered prolonged languagedifficulties and had less success in overcoming them than other NNES students. The data confirmedthe judgements of the Admissions Tutors made at the time of selection, indicating that their diagnosticabilities to identify students who might struggle with Masters study were sound. The findings in thepresent study are directly analogous to the Lancaster study since the Summer Programme studentsconstitute a comparative group to the ‘at risk’ students who also continue to experience languagedifficulties, especially in writing. The findings indicate that Cranfield staff involved in selection areequally able to identify students at risk from language problems.IELTS Research Reports Volume 11175