The education ministry should swiftly respond to urgent concerns among high school students and teachers about its plan to introduce private-sector English language tests as part of a new standardized university admission exam program starting in fiscal 2020.

The National Association of Upper Secondary School Principals has urged the ministry to take steps to “dispel anxiety” about the plan among teachers and second-year students who will be the first to take college entrance exams under the new system.

The National Center for University Entrance Examinations has designated seven English tests operated by six private-sector organizations for the program, which will allow high school students to decide which one to take.

These organizations conduct tests periodically. The current second-year students can take up to two of the tests conducted by these bodies between April and December next year. The results will be used by universities for their admission decisions.

The problem is that many specifics remain unclear.

The operator of the Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) announced earlier this month that it will not participate in the program, reversing its former decision.

This is abnormal given the ministry’s principle that any change concerning university entrance exams that could have a significant effect on students' preparation for them should be announced at least two years ahead of time.

The association of high school principals has pointed out a range of problems and concerns about the ministry’s plan.

It is, for instance, uncertain whether all students will be able to take English tests at the time and place they prefer, the association says. The envisioned system, which will allow students to take many tests as trials, fails to pay sufficient consideration to the issues of geographic and economic disparities among students.

It is also difficult to place much confidence in the fairness of the tests, including grading. Some universities have not announced how they intend to use the results of these tests for their admission decisions. The association also notes that there are differences among the test operators in their responses to the needs of disabled students.

A “considerable number” of principals have argued that the planned introduction should be postponed if these problems and concerns are not satisfactorily addressed in time, according to the association. That is hardly surprising.

There are many other questions about the appropriateness of using such private-sector tests for a standardized test for college admissions.

It is, for example, unclear how it is possible to ensure fairness in grading when students take different tests. It is also questionable whether it is possible to ensure equality in the environment for test takers at different locations.

Asahi Shimbun editorials have argued that the ministry should come up with effective measures to deal with these issues and be willing to put off the introduction if necessary.

The current situation, which one association official describes as “so chaotic it is impossible to say how things will turn out,” has been caused by the rash way the government has been trying to push through the reform of the entrance exam system without giving enough thought to concerns among students, their parents, high schools and universities.

Another factor that has further compounded the situation is the ministry’s lack of commitment to making sincere responses to anxiety among people concerned.

At the end of last year, the ministry set up a task force to tackle the challenges confronting the plan, but discussions at the unit have not been disclosed. No information about its work has been offered at the ministry’s website. The ministry’s attitude has done little to boost public confidence in the new system.

Since high schools’ academic and career counseling for students comes into full swing in autumn, the association of principals has asked the ministry to respond to their questions by the end of August.

The ministry needs to develop effective measures to address the concerns and explain them to schools as soon as possible as part of all-out efforts to allay anxieties among students and teachers.

As for the standardized test for college admission, the issues of fairness in grading and how to ensure quality have also been raised with regard to Japanese exam questions requiring written answers.

If the ministry proceeds with implementing the new system without taking solid and effective actions to deal with these problems and concerns, the credibility of the standardized test and the university admission system per se could be undermined. We are seriously concerned about this prospect.

The Asahi Shimbun, July 30