American Journal of Applied Science and Technology
27
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast
VOLUME
Vol.05 Issue 06 2025
PAGE NO.
27-29
10.37547/ajast/Volume05Issue06-06
Language Testing in The Age of Attention Deficits:
Rethinking 3-Hour Assessments for Modern Learners
Nayimova Nargiza Elmurot qizi
Senior Lecturer at the Tashkent Institute of Management and Economics, Uzbekistan
Received:
14 April 2025;
Accepted:
10 May 2025;
Published:
12 June 2025
Abstract:
This article critically explores the growing challenges posed by traditional long-form standardized
language tests such as the IELTS and TOEFL in the context of increasing diagnoses of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity
Disorder (ADHD) and the shorter attention spans characteristic of Gen Z and Gen Alpha learners. Drawing on
cognitive science, educational psychology, and recent innovations in assessment design, the article argues for a
paradigm shift toward more inclusive, adaptive, and modular language testing formats. It concludes with a set of
forward-looking recommendations, including the integration of AI-driven, focus-aware testing systems.
Keywords:
ADHD, language testing, IELTS, TOEFL, cognitive load, digital distraction, Gen Z, adaptive assessment,
educational equity.
Introduction:
In recent years, the global prevalence of ADHD among
children and young adults has seen a notable rise.
According to the World Health Organization (2023),
the worldwide prevalence of ADHD is estimated at 5
–
7% in school-aged populations, with rising adult
diagnosis rates. This trend coincides with a
generational shift in cognitive behavior: Gen Z and
Gen Alpha learners are growing up in fast-paced
digital
environments
that
influence
their
concentration, attention spans, and learning styles.
Despite these changes, many standardized language
assessments, including the IELTS and TOEFL, have
retained their traditional long-form structures. These
exams, often lasting 3
–
4 hours, test not only language
proficiency but also sustained attention and
endurance. In this context, it is vital to question the
fairness and accessibility of these assessments for
neurodiverse populations.
Notably, in response to these challenges, the
Educational Testing Service (ETS) recently shortened
both the TOEFL iBT and GRE General Test durations
from around 3 hours to approximately 1 hour and 55
minutes. This decision, implemented in 2023, reflects
growing awareness of the cognitive demands such
tests place on modern test takers. The change is
widely regarded as beneficial, especially as many
people today report difficulty maintaining prolonged
concentration
—
a phenomenon that some experts
attribute to the lingering cognitive effects of the
COVID-19 pandemic. The rise of short-form digital
media
—
particularly social media and one-minute
video reels
—
has arguably exacerbated attention
fragmentation. Ironically, even one-minute videos are
now perceived by some users as “too long,” signaling
a troubling trend toward diminished sustained focus.
Literature Review
Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller, 1988) suggests that
working memory has a limited capacity, and learning
or performance decreases when cognitive demands
exceed this threshold. For learners with ADHD or
attention-related challenges, extended test durations
significantly tax this limited capacity, leading to lower
performance that may not accurately reflect their
language abilities.
Research
in
educational
psychology
further
underscores the role of digital distractions. Rosen et
al. (2013) found that digital natives, especially those
who use multiple devices simultaneously, are more
prone to task-switching behaviors that undermine
sustained focus. Furthermore, test anxiety
—
common
in high-stakes assessments like IELTS and TOEFL
—
is
heightened in neurodivergent individuals, creating a
American Journal of Applied Science and Technology
28
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast
American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745)
compounding barrier.
Critical Analysis of Current Testing Models
IELTS and TOEFL are widely recognized and structured
around comprehensive four-skill assessment models:
reading, writing, listening, and speaking. While they
offer some accommodations for learners with
disabilities, the default design assumes uniform
attention capacity and testing stamina. The rigid
format and fixed test length disadvantage
neurodivergent test takers whose concentration may
fluctuate.
Moreover, these exams are often administered in
high-pressure
testing
environments,
further
exacerbating anxiety for individuals who struggle with
focus and time constraints. The written components,
particularly the essay and integrated tasks, require
sustained mental effort and uninterrupted reasoning.
For test takers with ADHD, this setup often results in
cognitive fatigue and reduced performance unrelated
to actual language ability.
In contrast, newer models like the Duolingo English
Test offer shorter, adaptive, and modular testing
formats that dynamically adjust to the test-
taker’s
performance. These tests typically last under an hour
and are optimized for online delivery. In addition to
being more accessible, these platforms also employ
item-level adaptability, which minimizes test length
while maximizing precision.
Despite these advantages, such assessments are not
without drawbacks. The primary concern is
institutional recognition; many universities and
immigration authorities still give preference to legacy
tests like IELTS and TOEFL. There are also concerns
around test security and whether these shorter tests
can adequately measure complex productive skills
like essay writing or spontaneous speech under real-
world conditions.
Impacts on Learners and Teachers
For learners with ADHD or related attention
challenges,
long-form
assessments
can
be
exclusionary, misrepresenting true proficiency and
limiting academic or migration opportunities. Equity
concerns emerge when neurodivergent students
must compete under assessment formats that do not
reflect their learning realities. These barriers may also
disproportionately affect students from underserved
backgrounds who may lack access to diagnosis,
accommodations, or strategies to self-advocate.
The emotional toll of such assessments cannot be
underestimated.
Repeated
failure
or
poor
performance on standardized exams can diminish
self-esteem and create long-term aversion to
language learning. This perpetuates a cycle of
underachievement and exclusion, contradicting the
inclusive aims of modern education.
Teachers, in turn, must navigate the tension between
preparing students for traditional exams and
adopting innovative pedagogies that reflect
contemporary cognitive science. Many educators
now integrate mindfulness practices, spaced
repetition, gamified activities, and multimodal
content to better support attention-limited learners.
However, even the most innovative classroom
strategies often collide with outdated assessment
formats that prioritize endurance over equity.
The disconnect between teaching and testing further
complicates the task of educators, placing them in a
difficult position where they must reconcile inclusive
classroom practice with exclusionary testing systems.
This misalignment calls for a system-wide
reevaluation of how language proficiency is measured
and validated in a neurodiverse, fast-changing world.
Recommendations
To align assessment design with the cognitive profiles
of modern learners and create more equitable
language testing practices, the following multi-tiered
recommendations are proposed:
•
Modular Testing Formats: Break down large
exams into smaller, manageable components that
can be completed independently or over staggered
sessions. This would reduce cognitive fatigue and
allow learners to perform each task at their peak
focus level.
•
Adaptive Assessments: Leverage AI and
psychometric algorithms to tailor question difficulty
and pacing to the test taker’s ability in real
-time.
Adaptive testing not only personalizes the experience
but also makes assessments shorter and more
accurate in measuring actual proficiency.
•
Focus-Aware Testing Technologies: Innovate
with tools that detect signs of cognitive overload or
inattention
—
such as eye-tracking, reaction times, or
behavioral cues
—
and allow for automated breaks,
reminders, or pacing adjustments. Such systems
could also offer optional features for learners who
self-identify with attention challenges.
•
Enhanced and Normalized Accommodations:
Accommodations like extended time, scheduled
pauses, or distraction-free environments should be
readily available
—
not only through formal diagnosis
but also as part of universal design practices. Test
platforms should include these features as standard
options to encourage self-directed personalization.
•
Universal Design for Testing (UDT): Adopt
American Journal of Applied Science and Technology
29
https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast
American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745)
testing frameworks that inherently consider the
needs of all learners, including those with attention
and executive functioning difficulties. A UDT
approach avoids retrofitting accommodations and
instead ensures inclusivity from the ground up.
•
Institutional
and
Regulatory
Reform:
Encourage universities, employers, and immigration
bodies to recognize shorter and adaptive testing
alternatives alongside legacy exams. This would
widen access and reduce gatekeeping based on
outdated testing models.
•
Teacher and Test Developer Training: Provide
continuous
professional
development
on
neurodiversity, inclusive assessment practices, and
the use of emerging educational technologies.
Teachers should be empowered to prepare students
for assessments that reflect both modern cognition
and future-facing standards.
•
Awareness and Attitude Shift: Launch public
education campaigns and policy dialogues that
challenge the notion of longer tests as inherently
superior. Stakeholders must begin to see flexibility,
not duration, as the hallmark of rigor and fairness.
Together, these recommendations aim to redesign
language testing with empathy, evidence, and equity
at its core
—
serving not only learners with ADHD but
all students navigating a complex, cognitively
demanding digital world.
DISCUSSION
The proposed shift in language assessment design is
not merely a technical upgrade but a deeply ethical
and pedagogical transformation. As educational
systems increasingly embrace diversity and inclusion,
language testing remains one of the last strongholds
of
outdated,
one-size-fits-all
practices.
This
contradiction undermines the broader goal of
educational equity and calls for immediate attention.
The convergence of neurodiversity advocacy, post-
COVID cognitive shifts, and digital media culture
demands that educators, policymakers, and test
developers reevaluate what fairness and validity
mean in a contemporary context. Prolonged exposure
to fast-paced digital stimuli
—
particularly among Gen
Z and Gen Alpha
—
has made sustained focus an
increasingly rare cognitive skill. Clinging to three-hour
exam formats in this era not only disadvantages
learners with diagnosed attention disorders but also
fails to acknowledge the evolving learning behaviors
of the general student population.
Moreover, a growing div of research supports the
idea that shorter, adaptive tests can provide equally
reliable
—
if not more precise
—
measures of language
proficiency. The psychological toll of long, high-stakes
tests is also well documented, especially among
students from marginalized or neurodivergent
backgrounds. The shift toward more inclusive testing
models must therefore be driven by both data and
compassion.
However, challenges remain. Standardization, global
recognition, and test security are legitimate concerns
for institutions and regulators. These must be
addressed collaboratively, through rigorous pilot
programs, data transparency, and multi-stakeholder
dialogues that include neurodiverse learners
themselves.
In sum, rethinking language testing is not a
concession to convenience
—
it is an affirmation of
educational justice. If we truly aim to assess what
students know and can do, rather than how long they
can sit still, then we must evolve our tools
accordingly. The future of language assessment lies
not in endurance, but in accessibility, innovation, and
human-centered design.
CONCLUSION
As language educators and policymakers strive for
equity and validity in assessment, it is essential to
question the ethical foundation of long-form
standardized testing in a neurodiverse, digitally-
influenced world. Embracing flexible, inclusive, and
evidence-based testing models not only serves
learners with ADHD but also aligns language
education with the realities of contemporary
cognition and learning behavior. The future of
language testing must prioritize inclusion without
compromising rigor
—
an achievable balance through
innovation and empathy.
REFERENCES
Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013).
Facebook and texting made me do it: Media-induced
task-switching while studying. Computers in Human
Behavior, 29(3), 948
–
958.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem
solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2),
257
–
285.
World Health Organization. (2023). ADHD and other
neurodevelopmental disorders. Retrieved from
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-
sheets/detail/attention-deficit-hyperactivity-
disorder-(adhd)
ETS. (2023). ETS launches shorter TOEFL and GRE
tests. Retrieved from
