Toeic Performance, Program-Level Disparities, and Career Readiness of Aviation Students: School Year 2025–2026
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.68050/JAMS.2026.376Keywords:
aviation English, career readiness, CEFR, English language proficiency, TOEIC performanceAbstract
This descriptive-comparative study examined the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) Listening and Reading performance of 1,367 students at an aeronautical school in Parañaque for School Year 2025–2026, drawing on the institutional management report produced by Princeton Assessments and Training, Inc., the aeronautical school's TOEIC partner since 2014. The study compared results across year level, testing point, and academic program, and evaluated program averages against the score floors that Japan-based partner companies (ANA, JASCO, and KGS) and the United States-based partner NORDAM require for international internship placement. Results showed an institutional mean score of 762, placing the aeronautical school at CEFR B1, one band below the college's own B2 benchmark, with reading trailing listening by a wide margin. The academic program explained far more of the score variation than year level: BS Aeronautical Engineering averaged 890, while the Aircraft Technician Course averaged 593, a gap exceeding two standard deviations. Only two of five technical programs met the 800-point Japan-partner floor at the mean, and none met NORDAM's 900-point floor. Nearly half of all test-takers (48 percent) fell below the CEFR B2 benchmark. A comparison of the December 2025 and March 2026 testing sub-periods showed a 71-point institutional gap driven mainly by a shift in test-taker composition, since March was a smaller session concentrated in the two lowest-scoring technical programs, not a genuine decline in ability. The study recommends program-specific reading interventions, earlier placement into support programs, and closer alignment between English instruction and each program's workplace register.
References
1. Al-Malki, E. A. A., Javid, C. Z., Farooq, M. U., Algethami, G. F., & Al-Harthi, A. A. (2022). Analysis of the English language needs of the Saudi tourism workforce: A first step into designing ESP teaching materials. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(2), 72–88. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.2.5
2. Albina, A. C., & Sumagaysay, L. P. (2020). Employability tracer study of Information Technology Education graduates from a state university in the Philippines. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 2(1), 100055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100055
3. Asio, H. T., & Quijano, M. G. (2023). English proficiency and academic performance of college students. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 6(3), 1301–1317. https://doi.org/10.47191/ijmra/v6-i3-50
4. Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2–27). Longman.
5. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
6. Estival, D., & Molesworth, B. R. C. (2020). Errors in air-ground pilot communication: An experimental study. The ESPecialist, 41(3). https://doi.org/10.23925/2318-7115.2020v41i3a5
7. Kamaruddin, M. I. H., Ahmad, A., Husain, M. A., & Abd Hamid, S. N. (2021). Graduate employability post-COVID-19: The case of a Malaysian public university. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 11(3), 710–724. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-05-2020-0114
8. Kamasak, R., & Sahan, K. (2023). Academic success in English medium courses: Exploring student challenges, opinions, language proficiency, and L2 use. RELC Journal, 55(3), 705–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882231167611
9. Liao, X., Zhu, X., & Cheong, C. M. (2021). Direct and indirect effects of independent language skills on the integrated writing performance of Chinese-speaking students with low proficiency. Reading and Writing, 34(10), 2529–2557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10152-7
10. Manuel, J. B. (2022). English language proficiency of senior high school students. Multidisciplinary Journal for Education, Social and Technological Sciences, 9(1), 71–86.
https://doi.org/10.4995/muse.2022.16638
11. Princeton Assessments and Training, Inc. (2026). TOEIC management report: PATTS College of Aeronautics, SY 2025–2026 [Institutional report].
12. Sadeghi, K., Ballıdağ, A., & Mede, E. (2021). The washback effect of TOEFL iBT and a local English Proficiency Exam on students' motivation, autonomy and language learning strategies. Heliyon, 7(10), e08135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08135
13. Silaj, K. M., Schwartz, S. T., & Siegel, A. L. M. (2021). Test anxiety and metacognitive performance in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 33(4), 1809–1834.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09598-6
14. Wu, X., Yang, H., Liu, J., & Liu, Z. (2022). English use anxiety, motivation, self-efficacy, and their predictive effects on Chinese top university students' English achievements. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 953600. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.953600
15. Zhao, W. (2023). A corpus-based study on aviation English from the perspective of systemic functional linguistics. Discourse & Communication, 17(5), 630–661.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Auhor(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Studies (JAMS) are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), unless otherwise stated. Authors retain copyright of their work and grant JAMS the right of first publication.
