A comparison of Ukrainian and Hungarian school-leaving English exams

Annually, hundreds of millions of students worldwide face the crucial moment of their scholastic progression: matriculation examinations. These important assessments, often a critical gateway to tertiary education, influence future pathways of countless individuals. This is particularly true in Ukraine and its neighbouring country, Hungary, where these exams hold significant weight. In both nations, school-leavers undertake English matriculation exams at independent test centres ensuring impartiality and standardization. These centres operate under the watchful eyes of official government bodies, the Ministry of Education and Science in Ukraine and the Ministry of Human Resources in Hungary, guaranteeing adherence to national standards. In Ukraine, the English External Independent Evaluation (EIE) traditionally evaluated key reading, writing, and use of English skills. Notably, between 2018 and 2021 listening skills were also assessed. However, the onset of the devastating Russian-Ukrainian war on February 24, 2022 dramatically altered the academic environment. The 2022 English EIE was cancelled, replaced by the National Multi-disciplinary Test (NMT), which initially excluded English. In 2023, the NMT reintroduced an English component, featuring 32 items focused on reading comprehension and the use of English. On the other hand, a flexible two-tiered system for the matriculation exams is employed in Hungary: intermediate and advanced levels. Implemented since 2005, this structure provides a nuanced assessment of students' abilities. Both levels evaluate reading, listening, writing, and use of English skills, corresponding to B1 and B2 levels of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, respectively, in the written exam. Separate oral examinations assess speaking proficiency, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation. This article aims to compare and contrast the English matriculation examinations in these two Central European nations, highlighting the similarities and differences in their approaches to assessing English language proficiency.