English Tests as Gatekeepers: Language Assessment or Linguistic Imperialism?
For over two decades, I have taught English in Pakistan—on chalkboards and smartboards, to first-generation learners and seasoned professionals. I have seen English transform lives. I have also seen it shackle aspirations, especially through the global machinery of standardized language tests such as IELTS, TOEFL, PTE, Duolingo English Test, and others.
These tests, marketed as gateways to opportunity, are increasingly being called out as instruments of linguistic imperialism, economic exploitation, and cultural hegemony.
So, are English language tests tools of empowerment, or mechanisms of control? Are they necessary assessments, or veiled barriers to mobility?
As an ELT practitioner from the Global South, I argue that both truths coexist, and we must confront this duality with honesty.
The Case for English Proficiency Tests
Let us begin with the legitimate rationale behind these tests:
Standardization: With thousands of education systems and language backgrounds, a common benchmark is needed. Tests like IELTS and TOEFL offer a shared, measurable standard for academic and professional readiness.
Academic Preparedness: Studying or working in an English-speaking environment demands proficiency in academic writing, critical reading, and oral communication. These tests assess those skills with increasing sophistication.
Global Mobility: A strong score can unlock visas, scholarships, fellowships, and admissions. For many students in developing countries, these tests are stepping stones to international opportunity.
Objectivity in Admissions: In theory, language tests level the playing field—offering a neutral metric beyond local transcripts, which can vary in rigor and reliability.
From this angle, English language tests seem not only necessary but beneficial. And yet, there’s another, deeper side to the story.
The Argument for Linguistic Imperialism
English proficiency tests are not neutral. They carry with them the baggage of empire, the privilege of the Global North, and the monetization of linguistic inequality.
Economic Gatekeeping: In Pakistan, the cost of a single IELTS attempt can equal a month’s salary for many families. Retakes multiply this burden. These tests often become a tax on ambition, disproportionately affecting low-income students.
Anglo-Centric Norms: These tests still reflect British or American academic norms, including essay structures, idiomatic expressions, and culturally loaded listening passages. What is being assessed is not just language competence, but cultural conformity.
Monolingual Prestige: The dominance of English marginalizes local languages, undervalues bilingualism, and positions other linguistic identities as deficient.
Neo-Colonial Influence: The global expansion of English language tests reproduces the soft power of the Anglophone West. Institutions like Cambridge, ETS, and Pearson hold enormous influence over who is deemed “ready” for higher education or migration.
Inequitable Recognition: A PhD scholar from Karachi may still be asked to prove English proficiency, while a high-school graduate from London is exempt. This reproduces colonial hierarchies of legitimacy.
In short, these tests often function as linguistic passports that discriminate by geography, class, and accent.
Can Both Realities Be True?
Yes—and this is where nuance matters.
As teachers, we cannot deny that English is a global lingua franca. Nor can we ignore that our students aspire to global platforms that require English. But we must also acknowledge that the systems we participate in are not ideologically neutral.
We are preparing students to pass a test that often does not fully value their multilingual intelligence, their cultural capital, or their alternative epistemologies.
That contradiction must be confronted—not by rejecting English, but by decolonizing how it is taught, assessed, and valued.
Rethinking the Future of Language Assessment
So what can be done? Several progressive approaches are gaining ground:
Localized Englishes: Recognizing World Englishes (Pakistani English, Indian English, etc.) as legitimate variants with their own norms, rather than judging everything against British or American standards.
Contextual Testing: Developing proficiency tests that respect local contexts, such as the CEFR-aligned tests by non-Western institutions, or community-centered alternatives.
Affordable Alternatives: Pressuring global testing giants to lower costs, increase accessibility, and allow wider recognition of online or open-source assessments.
Multilingual Recognition: Advocating for assessments that celebrate bilingualism—evaluating not just how well one speaks English, but how effectively one can navigate between languages.
Teacher Advocacy: ELT professionals around the world must raise their voices—not only to teach English, but to challenge how English is being positioned and policed.
Beyond the Test
As someone who has taught English for a quarter century in a postcolonial context, I am deeply aware of the power and peril of English. I have seen English transform students into scholars, and I have also seen it humiliate those who could not afford the ticket.
Let us be honest: IELTS, TOEFL, and PTE are not simply tests of language. They are tests of privilege, cultural capital, and economic access.
Yet, rejecting them outright would mean denying many of our students the credentials they need. The solution lies in radical reform, pedagogical resistance, and intellectual integrity.
We must teach English with skill, yes—but also with conscience. We must prepare students to pass these tests—and also to question them.
Because if English is the passport, then justice demands we ask: Who designed the border?
