This study examines impartiality of an EFL academic language rest and compares academic language abilities for Indo-European (IE) and non Indo-European (NIE) language groups. Multiple-sample confirmatory factor analysis with mean structures was conducted on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) scores. Findings indicate that partial measurement invariance was established for both groups. The two-factor measurement model (LC and non-LC) was found the best fitting for both the groups, and factor loadings were comparable. Also, even though two intercepts (vocabulary and reading) were different across both groups, the difference was not practically meaningful. Accordingly, it was concluded that impartiality of the TOEFL score interpretation for the two groups could be supported. Findings also showed that mean academic language abilities (LC and non-LC) were not significantly different between the two groups, which lead to the conclusion that the receptive academic language abilities arc not influenced by the difference in L1 or in the way of language education they received. The claims about decisions and consequences of the use of the TOEFL were also discussed.

The purpose of this study is to compare tense choices in writing research abstracts across different academic disciplines: Humanities & Social Sciences (HSS) and Natural Sciences & Technology (NST). Specifically, across the disciplines, it compares 1) tense distributions, 2) associations between tense choices and rhetorical functions, and 3) tense distributions in each of the rhetorical functions. One hundred research abstracts were randomly drawn from the Internet databases. Verb tenses and rhetorical functions of the main clauses in the abstracts were identified and the rhetorical functions were further classified as deictic functions and referential functions. Separate analyses were done for deictic functions and referential functions. The results showed that the conventions of tense choices were not different across HSS and NST. For example, tense distributions did not differ in both the disciplines in that the present tense was dominantly found the same for both. Deictic functions were not significantly associated with tense choices in both the disciplines and the tense distributions of each of the deictic functions did not differ across the disciplines. Referential functions, on the other hand, were significantly associated with tense choices in both the disciplines, and the tense distributions of each of the referential functions did not differ across the disciplines. Educational implications are also discussed about tense choices in writing abstracts.