L 1 The Key to ICAO First Experiences

L 1 The Key to ICAO: First Experiences with a New Language Proficiency Examination for Military Air Traffic Controllers and its Implications Dr. Dugald Sturges, Federal Office of Languages Hürth, Germany Dr. Christopher Hüllen, Federal Ministry of Defence Bonn, Germany BILC Conference, Vilnius, May 2011 1

“Tower, I think you misunderstood our request…“ 2

The New ICAO Language Requirements 1997 - ICAO Air Navigation Commission (ANC) reviews the existing provisions for air-ground and ground-ground voice communication in international civil aviation 2003 - The Council of ICAO adopts language Standards and Recommended Practices recommended by the Proficiency Requirements in Common English Study Group (PRICE SG) for pilots, controllers, air traffic service providers and airlines 2008 - These provisions become applicable. March 2011 - Deadline for ICAO member states to ensure that aviation personnel achieve ICAO Level 4 (Operational) proficiency in English. 3 L 3

“Project ICAO Test” L 4 The Tasking: October 2009: The German Air Force Office of Flight Safety (AFSBw) commissions the Federal Office of Languages with the development of regular testing procedures for military Air Traffic Controllers in accordance with ICAO Level 4. 1 st Half 2010 – All ATC personnel given assessment tests. 2010 - Development of new testing material in Listening Comprehension and Oral Proficiency in accordance with ICAO Standard with cooperation of the AFSBw. January 2011 - Testing in accordance with ICAO Level 4 begins. 4

“Project ICAO Test” L 5 Test Development: Development Team at the Air Force Officer School in Fürstenfeldbrück, with assistance from the Bundessprachenamt (BSpr. A) in Hürth. Test Item Approbation: • At the Air Force Officer School in Fürstenfeldbrück (GAF officer candidates) • At the BSpr. A, Hürth (Federal Police flight school candidates) 5

“Project ICAO Test” Train the Trainer: • 8 th to 10 th December 2010 at the Air Force Officer School, Fürstenfeldbrück. • English instructors and testers from the Bundessprachenamt in Fürstenfeldbrück, Hürth, and Army Aviation School, Bückeburg. • Goal: to introduce trainers to the testing material and procedure, in particular the similarities and differences to testing and evaluating English language proficiency according to STANAG 6001. 6 L 6

“Project ICAO Test” L 7 Train the Trainer: Topics included: • The Framework for Aviation English Testing • Test Purpose and Test Types • Fundamental Principles of Testing • Test Formats (Listening, Oral) • Test Assessment • The Role of the Examiner • Practical Application in Mock Testing Situations 7

“Project ICAO Test” L 8 Test Delivery: • Teams of examiners at Fürstenfeldbrück, Hürth, and Bückeburg. • Examinations delivered regionally • At BSpr. A schools (Fürstenfeldbrück/ South, Hürth/West, Bückeburg/ North & East) • Where number of examinees warrant - on location Test Population: Approximately 300 Military Air Traffic Controllers First Round of Testing: • January – June 2011 • By end of June 2011 ca. 160 ATCs will have been tested • Second round to begin in September 2011 8

L 9 Listening Comprehension Test • • 15 audio items 1 Multiple Choice question per item Each audio item is heard twice (once for Level 5) 11 items (70%) required for pass 9

Oral Test • Duration: ca. 12 Minutes • Four Parts • Part 1: Warm-up, personal introduction. (approx. 2 minutes) • Part 2: Control-related information. Description of job and experience(s). (approx. 2 minutes) • Part 3: Routine and Non-Routine Situations. Back-to back photo description (aviation situation). (approx. 4 minutes) • Part 4: Discussion. Aviation safety topics. (approx. 4 minutes) • Testing Team of 2: 1 Examiner, one Evaluator (with Evaluation Sheet) 10 L 10

Comparison / Contrast: “ICAO Test” versus SLP testing L 11 Listening Comprehension Exam • Non-native and “difficult native” speakers • Listening items heard twice each • “One out of three” MC questions • Primarily aviation-related items (limited topic areas) • Monolingual Oral Exam • Use of scripted oral examination questions • Restrictions on examiner feedback • Picture description task • No preparation • Exclusively aviation and professionally-related items • Monolingual 11

ICAO Level 4 = “SLP Level 2+ PLUS” L 12 • Examinees with a “good” STANAG Level 2 GENERAL language competency passed according to the ICAO Level 4 descriptors • However, knowledge of specialist aviation terminology and usage is essential to successfully deal with oral proficiency exam. • Therefore, experienced ATCs with weaker GENERAL language competency could compensate with job experience, whereas younger, inexperienced ATCs-in-training, who often were more fluent in GENERAL English were more challenged. 12

SLP level 2 requires ability to deal with ROUTINE situations, while ICAO level 4 aims at mastering the UNEXPECTED. • Reason: Most of the time, ATCs can get by with a limited corpus of standardized terminology. • ICAO certification aims at ensuring that aviators master the rare but critical situations when the unexpected occurs Therefore: Students are confronted with non-native or “difficult“ native speakers in listening items • The experienced ATC who has literally “heard it all before“ may have an advantage over the novice who is challenged by non-standard responses. L 13 13

L 14 The “Key? ” Or: Can SLP testing replace ICAO Certification for Military Aviators? 14

Examinees with valid level 3 certification according NATO STANAG 6001 have all passed the ICAO level 4 exam – albeit those with professional aviation experience had a considerable edge. L 15 Consequence: for newly trained personnel, a combination of a Level 3 SLP and the US Qualification Course are mandatory. 15

Of the first 82 Candidates tested, 3 failed the Listening Comprehension Test, while all 82 passed the Oral exam. All three cases involved OLDER (40+) ATCs WITHOUT recent SLPs or language training. L 16 Reason: the tendency especially of personnel with long years of service to settle into a routine “Tower speak“, which restricts the ability to communicate in unexpected situations. Consequence: for personnel already in service, RECURRENT certification of ATCs according to ICAO level 4 has been implemented and will be maintained as a quality management measure. 16

Does testing military Air Traffic controllers according to ICAO proficiency levels make sense as a means of maintaining and improving quality? • Definitely! Is testing military Air Traffic controllers according to ICAO proficiency levels legally necessary? • THAT is the question to be addressed in the second part of this talk… 17 L 17

Well, …. . NO! …?

ICAO is the International Civil Aviation Organization Strategic Objectives: • Safety – Enhance global civil aviation safety • Security – Enhance global civil aviation security • Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development of Air Transport – Foster harmonized and economically viable development of international civil aviation that does not unduly harm the environment

20

21

ICAO standards do not apply to Military Aviation. But… • What happens when - Civil and military aviation meet? - Military pilots and air traffic controllers leave the military? • What does this mean for teaching and testing at the Bundessprachenamt? ? Nothing!

• Civil Aviation Authorities accept language tests developed and administered by the Bundessprachenamt. • There is no need for an “ICAO Test” as such. • Military pilots and air traffic controllers leaving the military do not have to take ICAO tests.

Lessons learned: • The German Air Force wants to be as close as possible to ICAO standards. • They do not want “ICAO language tests”. • They want a combination of SLP and Aviation English tests. • They want a certificate which states that this combination is equivalent to ICAO Level 4, 5 or 6. • The Bundessprachenamt ICAO 4 test will be the exception, not the rule. • ICAO is the key to a stronger position of the Bundessprachenamt.

www. guy-sports. com/months/jokes_aircraft. htm 25