English Language Testing

Transcription

1 Item 7 Encl G Council 10 February 2010 English Language Testing Purpose of paper Mission statement/business plan For action To protect patients. Issues Recommendations To explore developing the Council s current English Language Testing of registration applicants. Paragraph Authorship and origins of paper Patrick Kavanagh Presentation to Council Further information Elizabeth Davenport, Chair of Registration Committee Patrick Kavanagh Tel: + 44 (0) pkavanagh@gdc-uk.org

2 Introduction 1. This paper will: Discussion describe the current level of English language skill expected to be demonstrated by potential registrants. (Paragraphs 2-9) illustrate current mechanisms available for applicants to provide proof of such skill levels. (Paragraphs 2-9) summarise current issues confronting the Council (Paragraphs 10-15) suggest policy development for English Language Testing (Paragraphs 16-22) to pursue an identified opportunity for the extension of language testing to European nationals. The logical extension of this opportunity will be to move away from current standardised approaches to testing certain categories of applicant. 2. There are two live approaches to two different categories of registrant. These are: Dentists: No proof of English language skill is required (except in the case of those applying for the Overseas Registration Examination (ORE)) DCPs: Proof of English language skill only required for non-exempt persons (essentially, non-uk or EEA nationals) in the form of an IELTS 1 certificate showing test marks above certain levels This disparity should be examined in the context of the different routes to registration coupled with an overview of the relevant legislation. Dentists 4. Paragraph 15 (1) (c) of the Dentists Act Qualification for registration in the dentists register requires an individual to demonstrate they have the necessary knowledge of English if they are any person who holds a recognised overseas diploma 3 (as long as they are not a national of an EEA state.) 5. Sub-paragraphs 15 (1) (a) and (b) cover United Kingdom graduates, EEA nationals and individuals with acquired rights and the requirements for such individuals relate solely to identity, character and health. 6. The assessment route to registration exists to allow any overseas dentist without an eligible qualification who is classed as an exempt person ( national of an EEA state in the text above or with the right to be treated as such) to apply to register with the GDC on the basis of an individual assessment of their dental knowledge and skill. These individuals are defined as exempt persons and consequently, in line with paragraph 4 above, we do not test their English language skill level. 7. If an overseas qualified dentist who is not classed as an exempt person wishes to seek registration with the GDC, they are ineligible to apply for the assessment route 1 International English Language Testing System: 2 Requirements for DCPs are: Dental Nurse / Dental Technician = General IELTS with minimum overall score of 6, including a minimum score of 6 in speaking a writing sections and no section to score less than 5.5 Dental Hygienist / Therapist / Clinical Dental Technician = Academic IELTS with minimum overall score of 7 and no section to score less than This paragraph gives the GDC the right to test individuals by the ORE.

3 and need to sit the ORE. Since they are not classed as an exempt person we are able to require proof of their English Language skill level 4. Dental Care Professionals (DCPs) 8. There is no similar examination for DCPs, who apply to register via the assessment route. When submitting their qualifications and syllabus, if not exempt persons, DCPs must also submit the relevant IELTS certificate to provide proof of their English language proficiency. 9. The Dentists Act makes specific mention of English skill level under the section dealing with Professions Complementary to Dentistry, stating that, a person shall be entitled to be registered under a particular title in the dental care professionals register if he satisfies the registrar.. [that he] has the knowledge of English which, in the interests of himself and his patients, is necessary for practising in the United Kingdom as a member of the profession or class to which the title applies. 5 Live issues 10. Overseas qualified applicants can perceive themselves as English speakers from birth. As this person does not fall under the definition of exempt person they are required to provide proof of their level of English Language skill. The individual may believe this to be unfair. 11. While it may be strictly applicable, guidance from the European Commission states Member States are allowed to check the linguistic knowledge of migrants. In this respect, language tests are not totally excluded, but they cannot be used systematically nor be standardised. The individual situation of the migrant must be fully taken into account. 12. This raises two issues. Firstly that there are English speaking potential registrants who feel that the need to prove their English language skill level is unnecessary. Secondly, that the language used by the European Commission provides a clear principle language tests should not be used systematically nor be standardised. 13. As such, the potential may be seen to exist for legal challenge to the GDC s current requirements for English language testing. 14. Research has been undertaken to provide a comparison with others activities in this area. For example, The GMC will permit alternative evidence to IELTS for applicants who have undertaken a qualification delivered and examined primarily in English Registration Operations have a pragmatic interest in looking into alternative evidences when qualifications are identified as having been delivered in English. Policy Development 16. There is a further and perhaps more fundamental issue of patient protection to be considered - that exempt persons are not currently subject to language testing until or unless a subsequent employer may apply a test. 17. The Commission policy approach quoted in paragraph 11 of this paper may suggest the following conclusions 4 Requirements for Dentists for the purpose of applying for the ORE are: Academic IELTS with minimum overall score of 7 and no section to score less than Section 36c, The Dentists Act 1984 (Amendment) Order A useful flowchart of the GMC approach can be sourced at:

4 i. In the case of ORE candidates (who are by definition not exempt persons ) the Council is entitled (although not obliged) to apply a standardised language testing regime, as it does with the IELTS, ii. For all other applicants, including exempt persons applying for registration as a dentist or a DCP, the Council may have, and may choose to explore the possibility, to require individual applicants to demonstrate language competence at a level appropriate for their intended role and indeed post, provided the Council does not: a. insist on any particular test or score b. make the demonstration of language competence part of the recognition process but ensures that it is separate (which may mean having a discrete process after the registration assessors have recommended and the registrar decided upon recognition of the qualification). 18. In common with other regulators, we have been considering how it is possible to reconcile the Commission s policy advice with the conventional understanding of the European legal position and our own primary legislation. 19. It is suggested that Directive 2005/36/EC deals with the recognition of professional qualifications and not the registration of professionals. Therefore it should be recognized that there are two distinct administrative processes: 7 recognition of qualification registration with a professional body for administrative and disciplinary provisions 20. In the United Kingdom, healthcare regulators are the competent authorities for both processes. There may be arguments of public protection that this should not prevent regulators from administratively separating the process into two stages. 21. Initial scrutiny of the European Union directive may be broadly supportive of such an approach. Article 53 in Directive 2005/36/EC states: Persons benefiting from the recognition of professional qualifications shall have a knowledge of languages necessary for practising the profession in the host Member state. 22. The Commission repeats this text in their guide on transposing Directive 2005/36/EC for Member States which refers to language tests needing to be proportionate and not part of the recognition of qualification process. The document continues: This means that language tests are not absolutely excluded, but they cannot be used systematically nor be standardized. The individual situation of the migrant must be fully taken into account. Moreover, there should be no restrictions as to the language certificates which may attest of language knowledge, or on any other means of proof. In addition, evaluation of language knowledge is not part of the procedure for the recognition of professional qualifications, but is one of the requirements (subject to proportionality) for access to the profession Appendix A of this paper demonstrates by means of a draft policy what the direction of travel may be. The current position is described initially with a potential end 7 Article 6 (a) of the Directive 2005/36/EC acknowledges this and also the diversity of regulation in other Member States in that these two functions may be undertaken by different organisations in one member State.

5 result following with highlighted deletions and additions representing recommended changes to the current position. 24. This direction of travel is not supported by primary legislation nor by traditional expectations of complying with EEA legislation. In the latter point, Appendix 2 an extract from the recently published USER GUIDE Directive 2005/36/CE - Everything you need to know about the recognition of professional qualification appears to confirm the possibility of testing migrants so long as that testing is proportionate and non-systematic in nature. Resource implications 25. There are significant implications in terms of the Registration and Examinations functions. To introduce an additional step to processes as well as an explicitly nonstandardised process will require a review of key performance indicators (both internal and against external legislation). 26. Development and implementation of this policy will require a training needs analysis/review of decision-making in the Registration function in order to manage consistency and robustness in processes that are deliberately non-standardised. Communications implications 27. The Council will need to explain to potential registrants its requirements to become registered including language testing levels where applicable. 28. Additionally, there will need to be a carefully managed communications strategy in order not to alienate legislative stakeholders as well as managing the risks that may exist if this policy development is seen to be about placing barriers to registration. 29. The key point may be that extending our ability to language test applicants we have not previously tested is derived from public safety criteria and is mitigated or counter-balanced by a simultaneous move away from an absolute testing requirement in other circumstances. Standards implications 30. A key element of patient protection is that all registrants must be able to communicate effectively with patients and the rest of the dental team. Equality and diversity implications 31. The Council s concern is properly with public protection; in parallel the Council has ethical and legal obligations with respect to equality and diversity, as well as with fairness in a broad sense. 32. The Council s existing practice creates a situation in which applicants are treated differently (in respect of language competence) according to (a) whether they are applying for registration as a dentist or as a DCP and (b) their nationality. Neither of these criteria has anything to do with public safety or professional standards and therefore the different treatment being meted out to applicants should be robustly challenged from a fairness point of view. 33. If we are to continue to treat applicants differently in some respect because we are obliged to do so by law, then we should be in a position to identify specifically and as narrowly as possible the particular unfairness we are constrained to perpetuate, and the legal obligation which puts us in that position, and our policy position (concern, moral objection, or otherwise) on that constraint. 34. By contrast, where we perpetuate different treatment of applicants in different categories not because we are legally obliged to do so but because we can, and choose to do so, we must presumably do so only on the basis that it is necessary (rather than desirable) to do so in public protection terms.

6 35. It is therefore recommended that policy development be accompanied by a full equalities impact assessment. Recommendations 36. The Council is recommended to confirm: o o The amended policy as attached to be a useful direction in which policy development will travel. Its agreement that policy development will be accompanied by a mandate for the Executive to explore the change in primary legislation that will permit policy implementation. 37. It will be subject to the executive working up and implementing: o o an implementation plan (with an effective date, to be timetabled against legislative change) to deliver the highlighted changes. progress reports to Council

7 English Language Testing Policy Appendix A Purpose of Policy Mission statement Current Policy Described in paragraphs 2-9 of this paper To protect patients To explore developing the Council s current English Language Testing of registration applicants. The GDC is concerned to ensure that its registrants have the appropriate language skills to work with patients and other members of the dental team in the United Kingdom. The Council achieves this: In the case of all applicants qualifying in the UK, by relying on their qualification (following a course of study and assessment conducted in English) as itself providing adequate evidence of English language competence Meeting its legal obligation to register EEA-qualified dentists with automatically recognized qualifications without an assessment of English language competence Granting registration without an assessment of English language competence to exempt persons who successfully apply for dentist or DCP registration through the individual assessment process Granting registration subject to standardized evidence of English language competence to non-exempt overseas applicants for DCP registration who successfully apply through the individual assessment process Requiring all non-exempt persons who are candidates for dentist registration through the ORE to undertake a standardized test Amended Policy With tracked changes What initiated the thinking leading to these changes may be found in paragraphs of this paper. The development of the argument that leads to these changes may be found in paragraphs of this paper. The GDC is concerned to ensure that all registrants have the appropriate language skills to work with patients and other members of the dental team in the United Kingdom. The Council achieves this by seeking to be assured of applicants English language competence whenever appropriate: Accepting that that UK-qualified applicants should have the appropriate skills by their achievement of the qualification but reserving the right to confirm individuals English language competence on an individualised basis if appropriate. Whilst recognising its legal requirement to recognise EEAqualified individuals with qualifications listed in the directive as well as those who undergo the assessment process to achieve recognition, the Council will confirm language competence wherever it can within a registration process (as opposed to a recognition process) both by means of individualized testing appropriate to individual circumstances as well as by consideration of alternative

8 forms of evidence that can satisfy the GDC. Seeking a demonstration of competence by all nonexempt persons who are candidates for the ORE that will be both test-oriented and open to accepting alternative forms of evidence that can satisfy the GDC s concerns (e.g. evidence that the applicant communicates effectively in English as their first language or has successfully completed their professional education and training in English. Authorship Patrick Kavanagh

9 Appendix B Extract - USER GUIDE Directive 2005/36/CE - Everything you need to know about the recognition of professional qualification V. LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS 64) Can you be required to know the language of the host Member State? The host Member State may require you to have a knowledge of its language where this is justified by the nature of the profession you wish to practise. In any case, the language requirements may not exceed what is objectively necessary for practising the profession in question (vocabulary, oral and/or written knowledge, active and/or passive). It must also be noted that, whatever the regulated profession, your application will be processed in (one of) the official language(s) of the host Member State and any aptitude test which you are required to take (see questions 51 and 52) will likewise be in that language. The procedure for the recognition of your qualification and any test of your language skills are two distinct procedures. The recognition of your professional qualification cannot be refused or postponed on the grounds that you do not have the appropriate language skills. However, there is an exception to this rule where language skills are part of the qualification (for example, for a speech therapist). 65) Can a language examination be imposed systematically? The host Member State may not systematically make you sit a language examination. Each of the following documents constitutes sufficient proof of language skills: - a copy of a qualification acquired in the language of the host Member State; - a copy of a qualification attesting knowledge in the language(s) of the host Member State (for example, university degree, chamber of commerce qualification, qualifications awarded by a recognised language institution such as the Goethe Institute, etc.); - evidence of previous professional experience in the host Member State territory; If you cannot provide one of these documents, you may be required to do an interview or a test (oral and/or written).