Educators and schools share a common objective: to deliver high-quality learning experiences and support student success. As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms society, this objective becomes increasingly significant. English language instruction now requires preparing students to thrive in a globalized, digital and automated environment.

The challenge: Teaching English amid rapid change

Artificial intelligence has shifted expectations for language learning. Students now have access to instant translation, auto-generated texts, speech-to-text and various language applications. However, these tools can present challenges in the classroom. For instance, students may become overly dependent on instant translation rather than developing their own language proficiency. Educators must ensure that students engage in authentic learning rather than using technology to bypass difficult tasks. Additionally, some students may use AI to complete written assignments, hindering the development of their writing skills. These challenges underscore the need for schools to integrate technology thoughtfully while maintaining a focus on genuine learning.

In response to these developments, it is essential to enhance both teaching and assessment practices. The emphasis should remain on teachers’ core strengths: guiding, mentoring and fostering critical thinking and communication skills that technology cannot replicate.

Why standards matter more than ever

In my role as a curriculum director, I recognized the critical importance of establishing clear standards and objectives. These standards serve as navigational tools, guiding instructional decisions and enabling timely adjustments in classroom practice. For example, if a teacher identifies a need to enhance students’ communication skills, they can incorporate additional group activities. Standards support educators in the following ways:

• Understand what students can truly do at each proficiency level.
• Measure progress in a meaningful, learner-centered way.
• Build intentional learning pathways.
• Design interventions based on evidence, not intuition.

Upon discovering the GSE “Can Do” statements, I recognized a framework that is both transparent and practical. Unlike broad descriptors, the GSE delineates language learning into specific, measurable skills aligned with authentic English usage. For instance, rather than stating that a student can "understand basic spoken directions", the GSE specifies that a student can "follow detailed multi-step instructions in familiar contexts". This level of detail provides a clearer understanding of students’ actual capabilities.

A shift in perspective: From measuring to understanding

A key advantage of the GSE is its transformative approach to student assessment. The process begins by asking, “What can students do now? What should they work on next?” Research indicates that dividing tasks into manageable steps reduces student anxiety and increases motivation. This approach fosters a sense of accomplishment and self-efficacy, both of which are essential for sustained language acquisition.

This shift is significant. It alleviates pressure on learners and promotes a deeper understanding of their strengths, learning preferences and challenges. Additionally, it equips teachers with actionable insights, encouraging the development of new strategies and evidence-based instructional decisions.

Tiered intervention: Where the impact became visible

At our school, we introduced the GSE to support students needing tiered intervention. The transformation was gradual but encouraging. For instance, at our school, we started using the GSE to help students who needed extra support. The changes took time, but we saw good results. In the first semester, 60% of students in the program improved their English by at least one level, as measured by the GSE "Can Do" statements.

One student said, "For the first time, I felt like I was making real progress in understanding English." Teachers stopped using general support and focused on specific actions linked to the "Can Do" statements. Students kept improving in English and felt more confident as they reached clear goals. AI can generate text, translate, and simulate conversation, but cannot replace the teacher’s role in developing empathy and nuanced understanding.

In one classroom moment, a student struggled to interpret the tone and emotion of a literary work, which AI could translate but could not fully convey the depth of feeling. The teacher stepped in and guided the class in exploring the subtleties of the text, illustrating the emotions, historical context, and cultural significance behind the words. This human interaction highlighted the teacher's unique ability to foster deeper comprehension and emotional intelligence.

Frameworks such as the GSE ensure that language learning remains centered on student development and the human dimensions of education.

Moving forward with purpose

As artificial intelligence accelerates change, our responsibility is to utilize tools and frameworks that enhance, but do not supplant, the human aspects of learning.

The GSE provides a structured approach to tracking progress, adapting to individual student needs and designing effective lessons.

English teaching is not in competition with AI; it is growing alongside it. Good frameworks and thoughtful teaching help students learn language and succeed in a world where communication, flexibility and human connection are key. I encourage you to try the GSE in your classes or programs. By using this framework, we can make language learning more effective and inclusive for everyone. Let’s work together to help education grow with new technology.

An L&D manager opens a slide deck and says, “Seventy people are on Business English this quarter. The feedback is positive. Here are a few quotes.” A finance manager nods, then asks the only question that really matters when budgets are tight:

“What measurable change has this brought about in the business?”

If that scene feels familiar, you’re not alone.

It’s almost cliché to say that English is no longer a nice-to-have in business. Across sectors, it’s a standard requirement across sectors. Leaders are demanding results, and employees who increasingly value the confidence that English brings, as Pearson’s 2024 report clearly shows. And yet, many organizations still treat language training as a recurring calendar entry rather than a strategic lever. Classes happen, materials circulate, learners attend. Business as usual.

Then the inevitable question arrives: Is this actually working?

The question “What’s our ROI (Return on Investment) on Business English courses?” echoes across the boardroom table. Out come the attendance charts, school-issued progress reports, maybe a few glowing comments. Useful? The Germans would say jein, yes and no (and of course they have a word for that).

The case for measuring what matters

If the above sounds familiar, or if I’ve simply managed to grab your attention, keep reading. Over this short two-part series, I’ll show how to build a measurement philosophy for language training using KPIs, explain why independent assessment via the Global Scale of English (GSE) is your best ally, and illustrate how all these datapoints come together in the only metric every boardroom finds attractive: ROI.

I’ll also show how the Pearson English International Certificate (PEIC) ticks that final box of recognition and reward. Although this post is primarily aimed at business stakeholders, I invite everyone in the EFL world to see how the GSE can serve as a business tool, alongside its methodological prowess.

KPIs: small, steady, and meaningful

In learning and development, measurement works best when it’s little and often. KPIs shouldn’t be an autopsy at the end of a course; they should be pulse checks along the way, data you can act on.

Short feedback loops after sessions, mid-course benchmarks, quick manager observations on behavioural change - these aren’t just admin exercises. They’re your early-warning and early-celebration system rolled into one.

I like to think of KPIs as chapters in a coherent story. Each chapter answers a different question, and together they tell a narrative that HR, L&D and the board can all buy into.

Let’s start with participation and regularity. Are people showing up and staying engaged? Track attendance, lateness and, for online components, log-ins and time on task. That’s your health check. If the numbers drift, then scheduling or content might need a rethink, ideally in tandem with your provider (trust me, collaboration here pays off).

Then there’s progress in level and skills. Here, independence matters. Use baseline, mid-course and endline tests that are external to the training provider and mapped to the GSE. Because GSE operates on a 10–90 scale, it captures micro-progress that broad CEFR bands simply miss. Where the CEFR might still say “B1”, the GSE can show movement from 48 to 53. A few GSE points may not sound like much, but in the world of adult learning, that’s a genuine success story. Where CEFR might suggest stagnation, or plateauing, as we call it in Applied Linguistics - the GSE tells you the learning curve is alive and kicking.

And finally, application on the job. Is the business experiencing tangible benefits from improved communication? And since our learners are the heart of any programme, their satisfaction and motivation levels are equally telling. Low energy or disengagement is often the first sign something’s off, long before the test scores flatten.

These KPIs are deliberately mixed, with some being complex numbers and others experience-based. That’s intentional. Research in e-learning shows you need both if you want to understand what’s really happening in a course, not just what appears in the final test report.

Why GSE changes the game

The GSE isn’t just a theoretical framework, it’s an ecosystem:  courseware, AI-driven assessments, analytics, the works. My experience as an LSP (Language Service Provider) owner and Head of Studies at choices® has taught me one thing: using third-party, reliable and organization-agnostic testing gives us a massive advantage. Businesses are often promised "pies in the sky". The problem? Those pies are frequently baked and taste-tested by the same baker.

Independent, GSE-based assessment is a genuine USP.

It’s external to the language services provider, which makes the data credible to L&D, HR and, most importantly, the board. It’s granular, so it captures those subtle wins that keep learners motivated. And it’s consistent across time and cohorts: gold dust when budgets are tight and every line item gets scrutinised.

When you can say, “We measure independently, we’re aligned, and here’s evidence of real progress”, you’ve earned yourself something priceless: a protected budget.

Coming up next

In the next post, I’ll move from "how" to "why", showing how these insights translate into measurable business outcomes. We’ll talk ROI: the costs (both obvious and hidden), the returns (both hard and soft), and the benchmarks that make all the difference. Because when you measure smartly, with GSE as your compass, everyone wins: learners, managers, HR and yes, even the boardroom sceptics.

We live in a world in which change is a constant. While change has always existed, lately it has definitely accelerated. There is an idea in society that we should embrace change and adopt whatever is new, with an underlying assumption – wrong to many – that what is new is always better.one that is often wrong

In the world of ELT, new materials are developed every year. It is unthinkable for most teachers to be using teaching materials that were published 10 years ago. Some would even claim that anything published before 2020 is already out-dated.

How does all this impact on the Global Scale of English (GSE) – published over 10 years ago? When it was launched in 2014, it constituted a significant innovation in ELT. The following quotes were provided by ELT experts at the time of launch.