When universities consider admitting international students, one question often takes center stage: How well will this student perform academically?
Oftentimes, the answer is sought through language proficiency test scores; while these tests are designed to assess a student’s English language skills, admissions teams often use them as a proxy for academic readiness.
But research shows that language test scores on their own do not fully explain how well a student will actually perform in their coursework. In fact, our recent study published in Review of Education shows they capture only a fraction of what actually drives student success.
Can language test scores predict student success?
Predictive validity, or the extent to which a test score can forecast future academic performance, is a cornerstone of language assessment research. However, English proficiency tests consistently show a weak-to-moderate relationship with GPA (around r = 0.2 in large meta-analyses). That means that students’ English test scores don’t strongly predict their grades in school; there is a small connection, but it’s not especially strong.
Case in point: in a recent empirical predictive validity study, our research team compared average GPAs of students admitted to university with DET, IELTS, and TOEFL scores. Across all three groups, students were in good academic standing no matter what test they took; yet, the correlations between each English test scores and GPAs were low. In other words, two students with the same proficiency score can have very different academic trajectories.
This begs an important question: If language test scores explain only part of student success, what accounts for the rest?
What other factors contribute to student outcomes?
The study systematically reviewed 54 peer-reviewed studies to explore how research has measured international students’ success, beyond English proficiency. We examined not only academic performance, but also a range of success indicators, like retention and satisfaction.
We found that while GPA remains the most common outcome measure, other indicators such as self-perceived academic readiness, satisfaction, persistence, and retention are also used, though less frequently. Several success factors stood out as especially influential, and these extended well beyond language proficiency. Previous academic performance was a consistent predictor: students with strong grades in high school or earlier university studies were more likely to do well in their new programs. Motivation and personality traits such as conscientiousness and a willingness to engage also showed meaningful links to academic outcomes.
It is important to note that social connection mattered, too: students with supportive networks and a greater sense of belonging tended to earn higher grades, report greater satisfaction, and persist at higher rates. Likewise, financial stability played a role: financial strain significantly affected students’ academic performance and overall well-being.
Students are more than their scores
Admissions professionals frequently rely on the predictive validity of English proficiency tests as a significant factor in decisions about international students. But our study demonstrates just how much of a student’s story is left untold when we stop there.
A test score can confirm that a student meets the language threshold to participate in academic life, but it cannot show whether a student will have access to the support and resources that sustain them through challenges they may encounter on their journey.
Even students with high proficiency scores may face adjustment challenges, financial pressures, or health concerns that affect their progress. By considering a broader range of evidence as used in holistic admission, from motivation and prior educational experiences to personal statements and recommendations, admissions teams can better recognize international students’ potential.
Of course, ethical considerations are paramount: variables such as gender or socioeconomic status must never be used to disadvantage applicants. Rather, admissions professionals can acknowledge the systemic hurdles students navigate, and work to ensure these do not obscure their promise. A more holistic approach not only paints a more accurate picture of who will succeed, but also affirms a commitment to equity and to giving international students the best chance to reach their goals.
Equally important is expanding how we measure success. If we only look at a student’s GPA, we risk ignoring dimensions that matter to students and institutions alike: retention, satisfaction, skill acquisition, and readiness for future opportunities. Our review suggests that success is multi-dimensional, and measuring it as such could lead to more informed policy and support programs.
The takeaway: predictive validity is only part of the picture
Language proficiency tests remain a valuable part of the admissions toolkit. But they are just that—one tool. By considering a richer set of predictors and success measures, institutions can make better-informed decisions, support students more effectively, and ultimately foster environments where all learners can thrive.