IELTS Research Reports

Tim Moore, Janne Morton and Steve Pricestudy of some correspondence between the reading requirements in the two domains, but also evidenceof a fair degree of difference.The main similarity is to be found in those forms of reading that required mainly a local and literalengagement with material. As was noted previously, this configuration was true for the vast majorityof items in the IELTS corpus, with many tasks requiring mainly a basic comprehension of relativelysmall textual units (sentences, inter-sentences, paragraphs). In a similar vein, a sizeable proportion oftasks in the academic corpus were also found to have the same ‘local-literal’ orientation. Such taskswithin the academic data, it was noted, tended to be set as weekly class exercises or on exams andtests, and had as their focus the need for students to understand certain discipline-based concepts.But while this particular similarity was evident, the study also noted a good deal of divergencebetween the two domains. This was mainly found to arise from the considerable variety of readingtasks identified in the academic corpus, especially in those that related to more extended assignmenttasks (eg essays, reports and so on). Thus, whereas the IELTS corpus saw virtually all task-typesfall within the ‘local–literal’ area of our analytical matrix, the academic corpus was notable forincorporating tasks that covered all four areas. Amid this diversity were tasks which seemed, on theface of it, to be quite remote from the IELTS profile of tasks, including, for example, those whichrequired a critical engagement with material, or which stipulated engagement with ‘a multiplicity ofsources and viewpoints’.These patterns – both of similarity and of difference – were largely confirmed in the interviewcommentaries of staff. Thus, some of our informants saw a basic congruence between the type ofreading they expected their students to do on their courses, and what they perceived to be the demandsof the IELTS test. Others, by contrast, were keen to point out what for them were clear differences.Disciplinary variation in reading requirementsThe similarities and differences observed between the IELTS reading test and academic study can beaccounted for in part by the variety in the types of reading required across the disciplines consideredin the study. Much of this variety, as we have noted, related to the broad division in the disciplinesinvestigated; that is between the ‘harder’ technical disciplines on the one hand, and ‘softer’ morehumanities-oriented disciplines on the other. Thus, it was noted that in the more technical disciplines(eg Engineering, Architecture, Physics, Biology), less reading overall was required of students, andthat much of this had the clear purpose of having students assimilate certain foundational concepts inthe discipline. Such a view of reading was affirmed in the interviews, where it was suggested that thecontents of reading materials on such courses were presented to students as essentially “the ideas theyneeded to know”.In the more humanities disciplines, by contrast, reading was found to take on many different guises.While students on these courses (including Media Studies, Linguistics, History, Management) werealso required to learn basic ‘concepts and viewpoints’ in their field, there were many additionalways they were expected to interact with material. In some contexts, for example, the task forstudents was one of comparing different ideas and viewpoints on an issue; in other contexts, it wasto evaluate these ideas; in others again, students needed to synthesise a range of material as a basisfor developing their own viewpoints. In contrast to the mainly ‘assimilationist’ approach to readingdescribed by informants in the technical disciplines, the view from these latter fields was that studentsneeded always to bring their own perspective to bear on material – an approach characterised by oneinformant as “the need to question everything”.246 www.ielts.org