Talk:TOEIC

Untitled
Was this written by a YBM/Sisa employee? I assume this because an ETS researcher would know better than to make these arguments. You seem to know little about language testing. I can't be bothered to edit the entry, but I recommend you pick up a copy of Bachman and Palmer (1996), Language Testing in Practice (Oxford) then find a subscription to the journal Language Testing.

I don't want to be nasty, but you should take the time to familiarize yourself with a topic before you publish your knowledge of it, even if this is done semi-anonymously.

221.157.74.170 12:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with the post above. Although, as a former YBM/Sisa employee, I would have to say that those guys would know better than to call the TOEFL a "TOEIC precursor."  Yikes.  That's so off-base as to be laughable.  This whole topic needs to be re-written. It's rife with inaccuracies.

--

What a ridiculous "article" this is! Though it pretends to be an article about TOEIC, it is essentially an infomercial for the rival Cambridge tests, created by interleaving unsourced rants against the American TOEIC with plugs for the British alternative (written -- surprise! -- in British spelling). After ranting for a while the writer briefly notes that the main points of the rant haven't been true since 2007, but treats the nonexistence of those flaws as a small positive that doesn't begin to make up for all the flaws. This article isn't worth editing.

Tuanglen (talk) 08:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

--

I agree with the previous posts -- this is an awful article. If you want to know more about the TOEIC, go to the ETS web site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muived (talk • contribs) 10:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately the ETS web site is as bad a labyrinthian shambles as they come on the interwebs. They are not interested in anyone systematically researching what the students will actually face on test day, especially the notorious short-talk listening test. There is a paltry free PDF download with no audio, and page after page saying something like "The is no material on this page", or the equivalent. If you want actual test-like material, you have to sign up and pay for them, or take the TOEIC. Three websites offering free practice tests retain the skeletal core of the short-talk listening test, but differ wildly on the audio presentation, one giving a close replication of the visual material, but allowing indefinite replay; another with exceptionally simple talk and multiple choice, but a close replication of the audio restriction.


 * Of course, if you take the TOEIC yourself, you must pay for it, and they hardly want you to run off then and replicate precisely what you saw and heard. JohndanR (talk) 16:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

--

Large sections of this article are lifted directly from the referenced articles, at least the "TOEIC no turkey at 30" article from Japan Times. Someone needs to help this article. 66.189.15.109 (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

color
On my screen, to my eyes, the "brown" square looks red.211.225.33.104 (talk) 07:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Wrong colors code
I got blue certificate with a score of 665.2A02:8420:508D:CC00:56E6:FCFF:FEDB:2BBA (talk) 00:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Korea
As of 2015, TOEIC was still dominant in Korea, with TEPS and ACTFL testing still lagging far behind.64.53.191.77 (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Correlations
The article needs to show some (attempts at) correlations with TOEFL, CEFR, ACTFL etc.64.53.191.77 (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC)