Beijing Outpaces Hong Kong in English Proficiency

Just how good is Beijing in the English department? Good enough to outpace Hong Kong, which has a legacy of 100 years of British colonization on its side.

Or so says EF Education, and they should know: they are one of the world's leading teachers of English as a Second Language, and annually release a survey of the world's best non-native speakers of English.

Their comprehensive study is in its fourth year and has shown that Beijing is on the upswing in terms of English ability, while Hong Kong has been in decline. Shanghai and Tianjin also narrowly outpaced Hong Kong when examining city data, although the rest of China as a whole ranked lower than both Hong Kong and Taiwan.

A full report can be found on EF's website here, while a special China focus can be found here.

The survey is quite scientific and comparable across countries but is naturally biased in favor of areas where EF has a presence, as the methodology is based on tests offered there. Wanna take the test yourself? Take it here (though you better have some time on your hands, as it takes 50 minutes to complete).

EF's worldwide scores ranged from a low of 38 (Iraq) to a high of 69 (Denmark), with China placing in the lower half, a mere 37th of 63 countries – sandwiched just below Russia (#36) and slightly above Brazil (#38).

China as a whole ranked lower than most Asian countries, outranking only four from the survey: Thailand, Sri Lanka, Kazakhstan, and Cambodia.

Here's China's breakdown by province, in case you were interested:

Now all EF need to do is help those white expat males.

Images: English First

Comments

New comments are displayed first.

Like most others, I had raised eyebrows at BJ being above HK. Singapore being below Malaysia was also amusing (English is the first and official working language in Singapore, while Malay is the working language of Malaysia and not everyone speaks English). The point that was made in these comments about the people who take this test is a very valid point, I believe. Interesting article though!

ohdjango wrote:

It should read '37th of 63 economies' - not '63 countries' - seeing as Hong Kong is ranked separately from China (and so is everyone'e favourite, Taiwan Province :D).

oops

caught me there

Books by current and former Beijinger staffers

http://astore.amazon.com/truerunmedia-20

It should read '37th of 63 economies' - not '63 countries' - seeing as Hong Kong is ranked separately from China (and so is everyone'e favourite, Taiwan Province :D).

plorf wrote:
The truth is, people who can speak English in Hong Kong have no reason to take the test, and neither does your average Beijing peasant.

The same can be said of Singapore, Iraq, Cambodia, Denmark, Brazil and the 57 other countries in the survey ... so the relative comparison still holds true.

plorf wrote:
And the EF results don't differentiate where the test takers are from, simply where they took the test. It's no secret that many mainlanders travel to HK to take the tests there, because of the ..ahem.. difficulties of acceptance tests done in the mainland have.

Here's what the link to the methodology of the survey (provided in article above) says:

The EF English Proficiency Index calculates a country’s average adult English skill level using data from two different EF English tests completed by hundreds of thousands of adults every year. One test is open to any Internet user for free. The second is an online placement test used by EF during the enrollment process for English courses. Both include grammar, vocabulary, reading, and listening sections.

There is no incentive for test takers to inflate their scores artificially on these low-stakes tests by cheating or cramming, as the results do not lead to certification or admission to a program.

 

The Equalizer wrote:
Another biased survey rendering the results meaningless. I have to agree the reporting here is subpar. Maybe you only get what you pay for int his case?

I've noted the survey bias in the text of the article above:

"The survey is quite scientific and comparable across countries but is naturally biased in favor of areas where EF has a presence, as the methodology is based on tests offered there. Wanna take the test yourself? Take it here (though you better have some time on your hands, as it takes 50 minutes to complete)."

Books by current and former Beijinger staffers

http://astore.amazon.com/truerunmedia-20

Another biased survey rendering the results meaningless. I have to agree the reporting here is subpar. Maybe you only get what you pay for int his case?

All information stated by this poster is for informational purposes only. The content should not substitute you seeking psychiatric advice should you have a problem with it.

No, EF is not joking, it's just terrible journalism on thebeijinger's part as usual, though they are by far not the only one to be fair...

"Breaking news: EF English test takers in Beijing have slightly higher score than EF English test takers in Hong Kong" just doesn't sound good enough.

The truth is, people who can speak English in Hong Kong have no reason to take the test, and neither does your average Beijing peasant. In short, it doesn't measure the English abilities of the respective citizens in the slightest. Test takers have a reason to do so, not just for giggles. They may plan to study overseas, need a certificate for their MNC job application or whatever.

And the EF results don't differentiate where the test takers are from, simply where they took the test. It's no secret that many mainlanders travel to HK to take the tests there, because of the ..ahem.. difficulties of acceptance tests done in the mainland have.

In short, like anyone who has ever travelled to both HK and Beijing can tell you: complete BS.

Are they joking?