A Comparative Analysis of Washback from IELTS and CET-4 Listening Tests on Self-Efficacy and Listening Metacognitive Strategies Through the Learners’ Lens

Liuhuan Li

doi:10.6918/IJOSSER.202512_8(12).0045

Authors

Liuhuan Li

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.6918/IJOSSER.202512_8(12).0045

Keywords:

Washback effects, Listening tests, IELTS, CET-4, Self-efficacy, Listening metacognitive strategies, Comparative study

Abstract

This study compares the washback effects of the IELTS and CET-4 listening tests on learners’ self-efficacy and listening metacognitive strategies (LMS) use. Using a mixed-methods approach, questionnaire data from 190 Chinese undergraduates and follow-up interviews with six students showed no statistically significant differences in overall washback between the two tests. However, qualitative insights revealed distinct experiential patterns: IELTS preparation strengthened confidence in daily conversational contexts and vocabulary building, while CET-4 preparation tended to foster improvement in later stages through drill practice under test pressure. Although learners reported similar levels of LMS use, interview data indicated that task type and difficulty influenced how LMS were applied. The findings underscore the value of incorporating learner perspectives into test design and pedagogical preparation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Alderson J C, Wall D. Does washback exist? [J]. Applied Linguistics, 1993, 14(2): 115-129.

[2] Bailey K M. Working for washback: a review of the washback concept in language testing [J]. Language Testing, 1996, 13(3): 257-279.

[3] Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise of control [M]. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997.

[4] Cheng L, Andrews S, Yu Y. Impact and consequences of school-based assessment (SBA): Students’ and parents’ views of SBA in Hong Kong [J]. Language Testing, 2011, 28(2): 221-249.

[5] Chou Y, Zhang Y. Xinlao daxue yingyu siji he yasi tingli shiti de duibi yanjiu —— Gaigehou xinsiji chengxiao chutan [J]. Foreign Language Testing and Teaching, 2011, (3): 29-49. [A Comparative Study of the Listening Test Items in the Old and New College English Test Band 4 (CET-4) and the IELTS: A Preliminary Exploration of the Effectiveness of the Reformed CET-4].

[6] Fu Y. A case study on the washback effects of CET-4 listening in a local context [J]. Scientific Journal of Intelligent Systems Research, 2021, 3(6): 107-112.

[7] Green A. Washback to the learner: Learner and teacher perspectives on IELTS preparation course expectations and outcomes [J]. Assessing Writing, 2006, 11(2): 113-134.

[8] Kirkland M C. The effect of tests on students and schools [J]. Review of Educational Research, 1971, 41(4): 303-350.

[9] Li H, Zhong Q, Suen H K. Students’ perceptions of the impact of the college English test [J]. Language Testing in Asia, 2012, 2(3): 77-94.

[10] Mi L. The listening subtest of IELTS and its washback effects on English learning [D]. Xi’an: Northwest University, 2008.

[11] O’Malley J M, Chamot A U, Kupper L. Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition [J]. Applied Linguistics, 1989, 10(4): 418-437.

[12] Oxford R, Cho Y, Leung S, Kim H. Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use: An exploratory study [J]. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, IRAL, 2004, 42(1): 1-47.

[13] Pintrich P R. The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning [J]. International Journal of Educational Research, 1999, 31(6): 459-470.

[14] Sun Y. Context, construct, and consequences: Washback of the college English test in China [D]. Kingston: Queen’s University (Canada), 2016.

[15] Tabrizi A R N. The effect of IELTS listening strategy use on the reduction of IELTS listening test anxiety and on IELTS listening performance [J]. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2017, 7(11): 1025-1036.

[16] Vandergrift L, Goh C C M, Mareschal C J, Tafaghodtari M H. The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation [J]. Language Learning, 2006, 56(3): 431-462.

[17] Wu J. Daxue yingyu siliuji kaoshi dui yingyu jiaoxue de fanbo xiaoying fenxi [C]. Diwujie jiaoyu xinxi jishu chuangxin yu fazhan xueshu yantaohui lunwenji. 2025. [An Analysis of the Washback Effects of the College English Test Band 4 and Band 6 on English Teaching].

[18] Xiong J, Li Y. CET4 tingli gaige dui yingyu xuexi celüe de fanbo xiaoying yanjiu [J]. University (Teaching & Education), 2020, 40(486): 78-79. [A study on the washback effects of the CET-4 listening test reform on English learning strategies].

[19] Xie Q, Andrews S. Do test design and uses influence test preparation? testing a model of washback with structural equation modeling [J]. Language Testing, 2013, 30(1): 49-70.

[20] Yang J. Jiyu xuexizhe shijiao de zhuan si tingli ceshi fanbo xiaoying yanjiu [J]. Scientific Consultation, 2025, (15): 111-114. [A Study on the Washback Effect of the TEM-4 Listening Test from the Learners’ Perspective].

[21] Zhong X. A study on the washback effects of listening subtests in new CET-4 on students’ listening comprehension [D]. Xi’an: Xi’an International Studies University, 2015.