# New Points Test: good or bad?



## crystalbreaker

_(Dear Moderators, I removed all the "triple w's + dot"s in front of my link because the system said I couldn't post a link without having 5 posts first. Now I didn't want to spam for no reason and I judged myself to be not advertising anything for a commercial use. Therefore I decided to be sly and post the links anyway. It would be appreciated if you could edit my post personally to enable the links (you just need to put "triple w's + dot" in front. Thank you)_

. . . . . .

Personally I am very saddened by this. I had my future all worked out: 
1. get a Bachelors degree in Business, get a job in business, work for a year = total of 4 years.
2. get this permanent visa by passing the points test: 
immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/885/]Skilled - Independent (Residence) visa (subclass 885)

*old points test:*
immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/885/eligibility-table-overseas.htm]Skilled - Independent (Residence) visa (subclass 885)

-My age gave the 30 points
-I was confident I could get IELTS 6 at the very least, and probably 7 = 25
-most jobs business-related gave me 60 points
-10 points for being employed full-time in Australia for a year
That equals 125 points; pass mark = 120.

However, things have now changed dramatically:
*new points test:*
immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/points-fact.pdf

-my age now gives me 25
-now you get 10 for IELTS 7, and 20 for IELTS 8
-one year work experience now only gives 5
-thank goodness Bachelors degree gives 15
-I studied in Australia for year 11 and 12, so that gives me 5 marks
=70 if I get IELTS 8, 60 if I get IELTS 7. pass mark = expected to be 65.

. . . . . .

Now that is pretty harsh. I mean, giving so much weight to a generalised English Test... It is not too bad for me however; I just need to get IELTS 8, and I think I can. However for others this must be spelling the doom of their future; not many overseas students can pull off IELTS 7 let alone 8.

I'm personally not sure why they are doing this. Aren't overseas students a good source of income for them? I know I'm paying 25000 per year for my business degree (as well as no concession on transport etc)

What are your opinions on this?


----------



## Wanderer

Immigration regulations are continually being reviewed and thus there is a danger of people studying with the intent of it providing PR coming unstuck.
Study and PR are two separate visa application processes.
The current raft of changes have been developed over the past two years and the changes for next year are just a culmination of the change process


----------



## Dexter

If these changes are indeed implemented it is obviously to limit immigration - especially from Asian countries such as China, Vietnam or Indonesia. It also focuses on people who already hold a degree and some experience in certain fields. Not sure if they are good and not sure if they will be implemented. I know though they are going to hit certain groups of immigrants which is probably the whole idea.


----------



## rodmanalbe

aw....it's so harsh now.
It wasn't 5 years ago  lots of friends of mine came here, with a less than basic english knowledge


----------



## Aimhigh

Well, I didn't know if working in a post office needed an IELTS in AU because the wife of my cousin who is a Vietnamese can't speak english well but she was able to get a job in a post office. Honestly I'm also wondering how she manage to get the job.


----------



## thangvan

I would think that the new point system really aims to hit Indian group.


----------



## Dexter

And I would say it really promotes them... Indians are specialists in IELTS and of all the potential immigrants they have the most chance of getting it. I would say it aims Asians whose language skills are usually worse. 

I personally think they should focus more on speaking and listening and require more in these two areas. Reading and writing is probably not that much important and even 6 in each of these would be sufficient.


----------



## Wanderer

Yes, good point that Dexter on the speaking and listening for they are probably more essential for good communication in most areas and with specific occupations where reading and writing is also important like medicine, that is usually covered by the occupational body with a seven requirement anyway.
As for Indians, I thought there is a certain ammount of english language used courtesy of the British colonialisation and one of the biggest problems is again probably the speaking more because of accent and the typical Indian way of speaking.

On an overall basis, it may seem english language ability has been given more emphasis but it has not too greatly for the occupational points have just been ommitted on the basis of you either are on the SOL or not and if you add the 60 points back in you'll again have the ~ 120 points situation.

When you consider the background to how the immigration points situation went out of control a bit for there was apparently quite a few lobbyists in action wanting occupations put on the old MODL listing for extra points and that was also co-incident with educational agents overseas promoting and private schools running two year courses solely for PR so you were getting inflated numbers of cooks, hairdressers and even accountants and IT people, not all having any great experience nor language skills applying for PR to overload the system with applications not required from a point of few of appropriately skilled/experienced people in demand, the new approach corrects that and you can even see with the priority for SMP applications, there is a significant emphasis by the states re experience to get sponsorship.

It does not matter which country a person is from for if they have qualifications to get assessed/listed on SOL and they have a good standard of english, being of a younger age with some experience they will be well on the way to being eligible.
For onshore applications via study, there will be an emphasis on the need to both study for a more highly skilled occupation and learn english to an appropriate standard.
Either way, it is appropriate that people considering immigration to Australia do attain a good standard of english.


----------



## Dexter

You see, the problem with Listening and Speaking is that both parts don't really test too much. In Listening you are to find out certain details and put them into a spreadsheet. The problem is that what you listen is a recorded conversation/speech etc. which is always plain, simple and very clear English (no accents, no street talk etc) - same as in recordings. Comparing these recordings to reality, the language is completely different. You get all those highly marked speakers to go to a job interview or speak over the phone and they don't understand what you ask them. 

Speaking is simply a joke. Your task is to talk for 2 minutes on a random subject. Marks are in most cases too high - there are lots of 7 and 8 but then these people go out on the street and they are not understood by local community. It is obvious for me that the system is not good and there should be other ways to test speaking skills. Maybe to get someone who is actually not a teacher to listen to recordings and give their marks as well? And they definitely need to be a native speaker!!! 

Why have I come to such conclusions? I met quite a few Chinese and Indians who achieved high marks in IELTS speaking and listening (of course the problem is not only limited to those two nations). The problem with them was that they could not understand me (I speak quite quickly although I am not a native speaker) not to mention lack of understanding of Australian accent. As for speaking... they cannot pronounce things properly, locals cannot understand them... We are then surprised why so many immigrants struggle to get employment. This is obviously because no serious employer wants people who don't understand and are not understood by others. 

What I am missing here is more interactive testing of understanding and communicating skills. And definitely more with local languages and not just recordings!!! Maybe instead of IELTS mark invite a recruiter, a bank customer service person and a transportation person to do interactive testing with the candidate and see how the candidate understands questions and how responds to them? Or maybe include more personalized test which refers more to their occupation? For example, nurses speak to patients, mechanics to drivers etc.

Wanderer - you are right about Indians. Their accent makes it very difficult to understand them. And from what I know IELTS assessors do not consider accents as a problem which is a BIG MISTAKE. I met Indians who speak clearly and are easy to understand but I also met ones who may speak English but that does not sound like English. As for Asians - in their case accent is probably less of a problem but pronunciation and grammar is often incorrect which leads to funny situations. For example, someone will tell you to pay "A dalla" which in reality means "Eight Dollars".


----------



## Wanderer

I suppose Immi are stuck between a rock and a hard place to some extent for other than taking over all english testing themselves, just like qualifications they are relying on the appropriate or what should be the appropiate system and that is the IELTS.
I suspect testing does vary significantly from country to country and they have upped the level in hoping for a general improvement.
Perhaps what does need to happen is that just like trades testers make regular trips from Australia to different countries, so they should have the same done for the IELTS and that would see more of a levelling and improvement in standards.


----------

