Does IGCSE ESL miss the mark?

By Pete on July 24, 2025 • ( 1 )

I like teaching IGCSE ESL although I’m not sure it’s always suitable for my learners. Here are a few thoughts I have on it, both good and bad.

Note, I’m writing about the Cambridge course here, as it’s the one I usually teach.

An alternative pathway in international schools

In the schools I’ve worked in, IGCSE ESL has formed part of the alternative pathways for Key Stage 4 study. These alternative pathways are typically for learners working at A2/B1 proficiency, who may find it challenging to access the English literature syllabus. Typical pathways are:

Pathway 1: first language English language and literature
Pathway 2: IGCSE ESL in Year 10, IGCSE English Language (only) in Year 11
Pathway 3: IGCSE ESL across two years

These options vary across contexts.

In this pathway model, IGCSE ESL clearly has its place. It’s a stepping stone to first-language English, and Pathway 2 offers a chance for learners to still attain two IGCSE English qualifications.

However, a pathway model like this could be seen as offering easier routes to better grades (for a transcript), which may be desirable for certain stakeholders. If learners are given a choice of certain pathways (rather than teachers deciding which route students will follow) then they may opt for a pathway that avoids the challenge of studying literature.

One of the Bell Foundation’s key principles of EAL is ‘high expectations with appropriate support’. I wonder if the pathways sometimes provide an out for having high expectations, or whether an ESL pathway is just more realistic for some. That’s on a case-by-case basis of course, but it’s something to bear in mind if a school allows the learners themselves to choose their pathway.

A crammed course

The above pathways also show how IGCSE ESL is a misused course in many contexts. The full course content (as exemplified through the endorsed coursebook) is intended to be taught across two academic years, yet it’s common for the course to be covered in just one year. I‘ve even heard of an international school that cram it into ONE TERM for some learners. This basically means that it’s not about coverage and depth, it’s just about teaching to the test.

Does it meet learner needs?

IGCSE ESL is a typical language course, assessing proficiency across four skills, with target vocabulary and grammar structures aligned to certain CEFR levels. It serves a purpose for more general language development.

If you look at an IGCSE ESL past paper, you’ll notice that things are quite… PET-like. They also feel a bit IELTS General too, although without the wide range of tasks. The content is pitched at B2 level at its highest, and while the latest syllabus update (2027-2029) suggests that it includes subject content across the environment, culture, history, arts, technology, etc, the language is still non-specialist. The subject content does not align to any academic curriculum that learners might be following in schools.

The skills coverage is very general ESL, and the tasks types are limited, and familiar to those who have attempted a Cambridge suite exam before. Little attempt has been made to add academic challenge, especially to the writing parts. These have little real-world relevance for the learners, who are unlikely to ‘write a 160 word email to a friend about a book/movie/school trip’. One section that does have some real-world relevance, the note-taking task in the reading exam, is quite predictable and formulaic. My main bugbear is that while the content of IGCSE ESL levels up from PET, it levels down from B2 First – a Use of English section (missing in IG) would arguably serve a purpose for learners developing their vocab knowledge in academic settings.

The coursebook for the IGCSE ESL course (Peter Lucantoni) does a good job of adding more depth, challenge, and relevance for learners, but cannot be exploited to the full if the course is crammed into a few terms. Overall, the assessment for IGCSE ESL feels too removed from the content that learners encounter day to day in other subject areas, and too EFLy.

That lack of alignment may have been purposeful, so as not to cross over with the Cambridge IGCSE EAL course launched in 2022. However, a glance at the content from IGCSE EAL past papers shows similar lack of alignment to any curriculum content, as well as quite a general (social) English focus in most parts. I’d be very surprised if that course finds a broad enough target market without hard sell.

Across the two courses (ESL and EAL), it feels learners are somewhat shortchanged.

they are encountering English for academic purposes across a curriculum so there could be scope to assess understanding of certain Tier 2 and maybe Tier 3 language, rather than more general B2 word lists
There is no literature focus, meaning that learners studying ESL across two years might miss out on rich opportunities for cultural understanding, empathy, perspective, creativity, analysis etc that literature can offer
The scope to develop writing skills is minimal if you stick to focusing on text types that are assessed.

Recognized by universities

This comes as a surprise to many (especially first-lang English teachers I know), but IGCSE ESL is a recognized qualification for meeting language requirements on undergrad courses in England. Achieving a high grade in the ESL exam is considered an equivalent to IELTS 6.5. Once you delve into the language requirements of certain universities (take UCL for example) you’ll see that it is accepted as proof of proficiency for a wide range of undergrad courses. Achieving a solid mark in IGCSE English Language after that would seal the deal, but it may not actually be needed.

However, the above assumes that students would want to study a degree in England! A lot of ours don’t, in which case IELTS/TOEFL hold more sway when it comes to meeting language requirements. With this is mind, IGCSE ESL sits in a weird space of being kind of undervalued by some first-language teachers, yet legitimately thought of as inferior given it is of limited benefit for international students.

Higher challenge than expected for many

I mentioned how the ESL course may be seen as an easier route to higher marks in English. However, the grade thresholds for the second language English course are really high. You need well into 50/60 for a Grade A in reading/writing, and 35/40 for an A in speaking/listening. There’s low margin for error, and learners really do have to perform on the day. In contrast, first-language routes can include coursework portfolios where there are multiple chances to revise and improve work.

A stumbling block for learners can be the listening component of ESL. This has *perhaps* got easier since changing to fully multiple choice, but it is still a challenge. Listening skills are not assessed in IGCSE first-language English.

Summary

Here are some plus points:

IGCSE ESL is recognized by many English universities as meeting language requirements for international students.
It’s a standard course for general English language development (as isolated from academic content across the curriculum), and can be a springboard to first-language English studies
The content of the Cambridge endorsed coursebook is comprehensive (in the general language context I mean)
There’s familiarity for those learners who have studied Cambridge exam suite before

And some negatives

The course is not often delivered as intended. The nature of the assessment makes it possible to cram the course content into half the allotted time
It does not cover academic English in any depth. Academic language is being delivered across a whole curriculum, so learners are not losing out, but the more general language focus of IGCSE ESL may mean it lacks challenge.
It’s quite tough to get a grade in ESL due to the high grade thresholds – something that is not always understood by learners/parents

What would I do about the course?

more academic content, perhaps covering specialist language from areas such as global perspectives or humanities
A literature-focused task, even one of the reading tasks being based on an extract from fiction
Much more relevant writing tasks for the assessment. I’m sure MFL courses like German have gone down this route with written responses including social media posts etc, at least that’s something a bit more real-world for the learners than emails…

Ramble over. Any thoughts?

Image by Tumisu from Pixabay