本研究主旨為探討航空英文測驗之合適性，利用質性研究(qualitative research) 的專家訪談及模板式分析方法 (Template Analysis Style)進行資料的蒐集與分析。首先針對5位飛行員及5位航管人員做深入訪談，其訪談資料使用輔助軟體Nvivo進行編碼程序，再經由資料中截取、歸納出受測者對測驗合適性之主觀認知進行對測驗的評估。研究結果發現台灣的航空英文測驗合適性是略為不足的，受訪者在主觀評價上給予的多為負面的回覆，針對提出之觀點逐一討論後，整理出航空英文測驗具有之缺失與測驗發展建議，其中以測驗缺乏真實性、測驗鑑別度不足、評分機制有問題等被提及次數最高，在發展部分則最推崇新增相關培訓課程。期望此研究可以提供航空英文測驗在推動後續策略或進行相關研究時的參考依據。

Aviation Safety is one of the most government-concerned worldwide issues. According to Ritter’s research in 1996, successful communication is very crucial to the aviation industry in maintaining air safety. Moreover, previous studies show that there are numerous aviation incidents and accidents originated from miscommunication, which has been identified as a major contributing factor in fatal airplane crashes. After several serious miscommunication aviation incidents due to insufficient English knowledge, ICAO realized that proficiency in English communication is necessary. As a result, ICAO decided to raise the language proficiency requirements (LPR) for the radiotelephone communication provisions, and establish a set of LPRs in 2003. In 2008, pilots and controllers in ICAO member states were required to pass the aviation proficiency test in order to fly internationally or direct traffic at international airports. Such requirement aims to increase English proficiency and decrease accident rates. Although Taiwan is not a member of ICAO, Taiwan follows its rules accordingly. Nevertheless, few studies related to aviation English test in Taiwan have been reported since Taiwan implemented the language requirements.
Our research aimed to assess the effectiveness of the aviation English test in Taiwan. Qualitative methods were used to collect and analyze data. Through one-on-one in-depth interview, the subjective perception of pilots and controllers for the aviation English test was recorded. The data were then transcribed into written narratives, which were then analyzed via Template Analysis Style and were then fitted into Nvivo program for coding, filtering, and eliciting information about the subjects’ perceived effectiveness of the aviation English test. Analyzed results indicated that the effectiveness of aviation English test was insufficient, largely due to its lack of consistency with the actual radiotelephone communication, lack of differentiation, and inconsistency of the test grading system. This study recommended introducing and integrating training programs for aviation English test in order to improve test effectiveness.

英文文獻
Air Transport, A. (1992). Research agenda for data link: Proposed for inclusion in the ATC/flight deck integration section of the national plan for aviation human factors. Washington, DC: Author.
Alderson, J. C. (2009). Air safety, language assessment policy, and policy implementation: The case of aviation English. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 168-187.
Alderson, J. C. (2010). A survey of aviation English tests. Language Testing, 27(1), 51-72.
Alderson, J. C. (2011). The politics of aviation English testing. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(4), 386-403.
Basturkmen, H., & Elder, C. (2004). 27 The Practice of LSP. The handbook of applied linguistics, 672.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S., K. (2003). Qualitative research for education (4th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Brown, A. (1995). The effect of rater variables in the development of an occupation-specific language performance test. Language Testing, 12(1), 1-15
Campbell-Laird, K. (2004). Aviation English: A review of the language of international civil aviation. In Professional Communication Conference, 2004. IPCC 2004. Proceedings. International (pp. 253-261). IEEE.
Clark, J. L. D. (1975). Theoretical and technical considerations in oral proficiency testing. Testing language proficiency, 10-28.
Corradini, P., & Cacciari, C. (2002). The effect of workload and workshift on air traffic control: a taxonomy of communicative problems. Cognition, technology & work, 4(4), 229-239.
Cutting, J. (2012). English for airport ground staff. English for Specific Purposes, 31(1), 3-13.
Dambier, M., & Hinkelbein, J. (2006). Analysis of 2004 German general aviation aircraft accidents according to the HFACS model. Air medical journal, 25(6), 265-269.
de Moraes Garcia, A. C. (2015). What do ICAO Language Proficiency Test Developers and Raters Have to Say about the ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements 12 Years after their Publication? (Doctoral dissertation), LANCASTER UNIVERSITY.
Douglas, D. (2004). Assessing the language of international civil aviation: Issues of validity and impact. In IEEE international professional communication conference (pp. 248-252).
Douglas, D. (2014). Nobody seems to speak English here today: Enhancing assessment and training in aviation English. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 2(2), 1-12.
Emery, H. J. (2014). Developments in LSP testing 30 years on? The case of aviation English. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(2), 198-215
Farris, C., Trofimovich, P., Segalowitz, N., & Gatbonton, E. (2008). Air traffic communication in a second language: Implications of cognitive factors for training and assessment. Tesol Quarterly, 397-410
Garcia, A. C. M. (2014). Testing English for the specific purpose of aeronautical communications: issues in pronunciation assessment. (Unpublished Masters module assignment), Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Howard, J. W. (2008). “Tower, Am I Cleared to Land?”: Problematic Communication in Aviation Discourse. Human Communication Research, 34(3), 370-391.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for Language Teachers. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
ICAO. (2004). Manual on the implementation of the ICAO language proficiency requirements (Doc 9835 AN/453).
ICAO. (2010). Manual on the Implementation of ICAO Language Proficiency Requirements, 2nd Edition (Doc. 9835).
Jones, R. (1979). Performance testing of second language proficiency. Concepts in language testing: Some recent studies, 50-57.
Kim, H. (2013). Exploring the construct of radiotelephony communication: A critique of the ICAO English testing policy from the perspective of Korean aviation experts. Papers in Language Testing and Assessment, 2(2), 103-110.
Kim, H., & Elder, C. (2009). Understanding Aviation English as a Lingua Franca: Perceptions of Korean Aviation Personnel. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 23.1-23.17
Kim, H., & Elder, C. (2015). Interrogating the construct of aviation English: Feedback from test takers in Korea. Language Testing, 32(2), 129-149
Knoch, U. (2009). Collaborating with ESP stakeholders in rating scale validation: the case of the ICAO rating scale. SPAAN FELLOW, 1001, 21.
Knoch, U. (2014). Using subject specialists to validate an ESP rating scale: The case of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) rating scale. English for Specific Purposes, 33, 77-86
Linde, C. (1988). The quantitative study of communicative success: Politeness and accidents in aviation discourse. Language in Society, 17(03), 375-399
Mackay, R., & Mountford, A. (1978). English for Specific Purposes: A case study approach. Longman London.
Miller, W. L., & & Crabtree, B. F. (1992). Doing qualitative research (1st ed.). London:Sage.
Monteiro, A. L. T. (2013). Radiotelephony communications: threats in a multicultural context. Aviation in Focus-Journal of Aeronautical Sciences, 3(2), 46-69
Morrow, D., Rodvold, M., & Lee, A. (1994). Nonroutine transactions in controller‐pilot communication. Discourse Processes, 17(2), 235-258
Nevile, M. (2004). Beyond the black box: Talk-in-interaction in the airline cockpit. Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of English for specific purposes (Vol. 120). John Wiley & Sons.
Pfeiffer, A. (2009). Inter-rater reliability in an aviation speaking test. Unpublished Masters dissertation. Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Prado, M. C. d. A. (2015). Levantamento dos padrões léxico-gramaticais do inglês para aviação: um estudo vetorado pela Linguística de Corpus. [Survey on the lexicogrammatical patterns in aviation English: a study conducted by corpus linguistics]. Universidade de São Paulo,Brazil.
Prinzo, O. V., & Thompson, A. C. (2009). The ICAO English language proficiency rating scale applied to enroute voice communications of U.S. and foreign pilots. DOT/FAA/AM‐09/10,Washington D.C., FAA publishing.
Ragan, P. H. (1997). Aviation english: An introduction. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 7(2 ).
Ragan, P. H. (2007). Cross-cultural communication in aviation. In Evidence-based LSP: Translation, text and terminology. Selected papers from LSP2003, the 14th European Symposium on Language for Special Purposes held at the University of Surrey, Guildford, England, in cooperation with the AILA Scientific Commission on Language for Special Purposes (pp. 54-63).
Rahman, M. (2015). English for Specific Purposes (ESP): A Holistic Review. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3(1), 24-31.
Read, J., & Knoch, U. (2011). Clearing the air: Applied linguistic perspectives on aviation communication. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 32(3).
Ritter, J. (1996). Transcript of crash shows controller error/Review reveals poor English “Over and Over.”. USA Today, 9.
Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1),3-21.
Tiewtrakul, T., & Fletcher, S. R. (2010). The challenge of regional accents for aviation English language proficiency standards: A study of difficulties in understanding in air traffic control–pilot communications. Ergonomics, 53(2), 229-239.
Uplinger, S. (1997). English-language training for air traffic controllers must go beyond basic ATC vocabulary. Airport Operations, 23, 1-5.
Wang, A. (2008). Reassessing the position of Aviation English: from a special language to English for Specific Purposes. Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos (AELFE)(15), 151-164
Weir, C. J. (2005). Language testing and validation. UK: Macmillan.
Williams M. (1997) Social Surveys: Design to Analysis. In: T. May (Ed.) Social Research Issues, Methods and Process. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Wyss-Bühlmann, E. (2005). Variation and co-operative communication strategies in air traffic control English (Vol. 272). Peter Lang.

中文文獻
王明揚 （2010）。 飛航安全靜態與動態資訊溝通與呈現之研究---總計畫。清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花（2005）。質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步驟分析。
身心障礙研究，3-2，頁122-136。
吳芝儀、廖梅花 （2001）。 質性研究入門: 紮根理論研究方法。臺北: 濤石文化。
徐翰 （2005）。 飛行員與國內航管溝通用語之差異研究。清華大學工業工程與工程管理學系。
張芬芬 （2010）。 質性資料分析的五步驟: 在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育期刊， 35，頁 87-120。
郭玉霞、劉世閔、王為國、黃世奇、何明軒、洪梓榆（2009）。質性研究資料分析: NVivo 8 活用寶典。高等教育文化事業有限公司。
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究。台北：雙葉。
項退結編譯（1976）。西洋哲學辭典。上海：上海辭書出版社。
陳信華（2009）。航空程發展趨勢與關鍵因素：以桃園機場為例。台灣科技大學工業管理系。
蔡玟玲、何立己（2003）。航管通話研究初探。「中國航空太空學會/中華民用航空學會學術研討會」發表之論文，成功大學。
蔡玟玲、何立己（2005）。飛航語言檢定測驗的發展與考量 。「中國航太學會/中華民航學會聯合學術研討會」發表之論文， 成功大學。