BEYOND COMPARISON: HIGHLIGHTING THE GAP SIMILARITIES IN DUOLINGO AND ENGLISHSCORE TESTS
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19781170
Kalit so‘zlar
digital English test; Duolingo English Test; EnglishScore; platform weaknesses; thematic analysis; user experience; Indonesian EFL.Annotasiya
The Duolingo English Test (DET) and the British Council's EnglishScore are gaining popularity as alternative digital English tests. Previous research has tended to compare the strengths of both platforms, but has rarely identified patterns of weaknesses that users may share, albeit with varying degrees of severity. This study aims to explore and thematically compare the weaknesses reported by DET and EnglishScore users in the Indonesian EFL context. The study used a qualitative approach with thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) of open-ended comments from two independent surveys. A total of 129 DET users and 133 EnglishScore users (total N=262) – Teacher Professional Education program students at a private university in Surabaya – completed a user experience questionnaire, including open-ended questions about the most difficult parts to understand. The analysis yielded six themes of weaknesses that emerged across both platforms: (1) unclear or confusing instructions; (2) technical stability issues (crashes/self-exiting); (3) audio/speaking issues (voice detection and speed); (4) too short a turnaround time; (5) difficulty for English beginners; and (6) lack of specific feedback. Although the frequency of complaints was significantly higher on DET, the pattern of weaknesses experienced was qualitatively the same across both platforms. Digital English language testing platforms, regardless of their performance level, face similar functional challenges. Developers need to prioritize improvements in instruction clarity, technical stability, and accessibility for users with low English proficiency. This research contributes to the literature on user experience evaluation of digital assessment platforms in developing countries.
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar ro‘yhati
Arisandi, V., Yulianti, H. T., Prihamdani, D., Juanda, J., & Mulya, P. W. (2025). Test-taking difficulties in Englishscore reading assessment: Insights from learner experiences. TELL-US JOURNAL, 11(3), 900–917. https://doi.org/10.22202/tus.2025.v11i3.10027
Aryadoust, V., Zakaria, A., & Jia, Y. (2024). Investigating the affordances of OpenAI’s large language model in developing listening assessments. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100204
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Burstein, J., Cardwell, R., Chuang, P.-L., Michalowski, A., & Nydick, S. (2025). Exploring AI-Enabled Test Practice, Affect, and Test Outcomes in Language Assessment (arXiv:2508.17108). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.17108
Chikezie, C., Chanpaisaeng, P., Agarwal, P., Afroz, S., Madhwani, B., Choudhuri, R., Anderson, A., Velhal, P., Morreale, P., Bogart, C., Sarma, A., & Burnett, M. (2025). Measuring SES-related traits relating to technology usage: Two validated surveys. Empirical Software Engineering, 30(6), 159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-025-10683-5
Chuang, P.-L., & Yan, X. (2025). Language assessment in the era of generative artificial intelligence: Opportunities, challenges, and future directions. System, 134, 103846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2025.103846
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (third edition). SAGE.
Gkintoni, E., Antonopoulou, H., Sortwell, A., & Halkiopoulos, C. (2025). Challenging Cognitive Load Theory: The Role of Educational Neuroscience and Artificial Intelligence in Redefining Learning Efficacy. Brain Sciences, 15(2), 203. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15020203
Isaacs, T., Hu, R., Trenkic, D., & Varga, J. (2023). Examining the predictive validity of the Duolingo English Test: Evidence from a major UK university. Language Testing, 40(3), 748–770. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231158550
Isbell, D. R., & Kremmel, B. (2020). Test Review: Current options in at-home language proficiency tests for making high-stakes decisions. Language Testing, 37(4), 600–619. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532220943483
Kang, O., Yan, X., Kostromitina, M., Thomson, R., & Isaacs, T. (2024). Fairness of using different English accents: The effect of shared L1s in listening tasks of the Duolingo English test. Language Testing, 41(2), 263–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231179134
Kurniati, D., Riyono, A., Solaeman, A., R. Millan, A., & Noordin, N. (2025). Exploring English proficiency levels of Indonesian university students through EnglishScore-based assessment. Indonesian EFL Journal, 11(3), 539–552. https://doi.org/10.25134/9kjdz259
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Nachdr.). Sage.
Maknun, L., Zamzani, Z., & Jamilah, J. (2024). Unveiling Indonesian EFL Teacher’s Perceptions and Challenges of Technology-based Assessment as and for Learning. International Journal of Language Testing, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.22034/ijlt.2023.400628.1260
Maryansyah, Y., & Danim, S. (2024). Experiences, Perceptions, and Challenges of Indonesian EFL University Students with Online Assessment in the Digital Age. In M. Kristiawan, N. D. Lestari, D. Samitra, Z. F. Rozi, M. N. Naser, R. M. Valianti, M. Muthmainnah, B. Badeni, F. A. Yanti, D. Apryani, O. L. Agusta, J. Siska, E. Viona, E. Purwandari, & R. D. Riastuti (Eds.), Online Conference of Education Research International (OCERI 2023) (Vol. 775, pp. 719–732). Atlantis Press SARL. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-108-1_71
Pearson, W. S. (2023). Test review: High-stakes English language proficiency tests—Enquiry, resit, and retake policies. Language Testing, 40(4), 1022–1035. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322231186706
Sapru, A. (2026). Psychological resistance to AI: How regulatory focus fuels AI anxiety and negative attitudes toward AI. Technology in Society, 86, 103251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103251
Shvetsova, I., Lytvynska, S., Davydova, T., Romanchuk, S., & Rusavska, O. (2025). Intelligent Language Systems and Technical Linguistic Solutions in the Digital Environment. International Journal on Culture, History, and Religion, 7(SI1). https://doi.org/10.63931/ijchr.v7iSI1.195
Sun, X., Dou, W., & Yang, Y. (2025). The socio-emotional dangers of using Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in second language (L2) education: Unveiling Chinese EFL teachers’ perceptions and experiences. Acta Psychologica, 261, 105956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105956
Ulinuha, A., Parnawati, T. A., & Chotimah, C. (2025). From perception to performance: Investigating students’ learning outcomes in mobile-based English proficiency testing. Inteligensi : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 8(1), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.33366/ilg.v8i1.7003
Wali, A. I., Syarif, A. R., & Syahriani, R. (2025). Proficiency level score of Duolingo English practice test. 11(2).
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (Sixth edition). SAGE.
