d9721547b7e3fb51f874241e0e7ae8a3.webp

How the MET Compares to TOEFL and IELTS

When choosing an English proficiency test—whether for academic, immigration, or professional use—it’s vital to examine how MET stacks up against the well-known TOEFL and IELTS. 

1. Test Purpose & Recognition

The MET, developed by Michigan Language Assessment (a collaboration between the University of Michigan and Cambridge Assessment English), is a multilevel American English exam geared toward learners from high-beginner to lower-advanced levels (CEFR A2–C1) and is used for educational, professional, and immigration purposes.

It’s recognized internationally, including by the Australian Department of Home Affairs for visa applications and by U.S. healthcare and licensing boards 

By contrast:

IELTS (Academic and General Training) and TOEFL iBT are primarily used for academic admissions and broader purpose including immigration, with IELTS also offering an option for general training contexts 

2. Format & Flexibility

  • MET offers a modular exam: you can take two-skill (Listening + Reading) or four-skill (including Writing & Speaking), and even individual sections .
  • It’s also flexible in scheduling—MET can be taken 24/7 (including weekends and holidays) with computer-based testing and fast results 

By comparison:

  • IELTS offers two versions (Academic or General Training), with all four skills tested in each session. Format can be paper-based or computer-based.
  • TOEFL iBT is entirely internet-based, covering all four skills in one session 

3. Scoring & CEFR Alignment

  • MET uses a scaled scoring system (0–80 per skill), aligned to the CEFR (A2–C1).
  • IELTS uses a 9-band scale that maps to CEFR (e.g., B2 corresponds to band 5.5–6.0, C1 to 6.5–7.5).
  • TOEFL iBT is scored out of 120, but equivalency tables link certain score ranges to the CEFR (e.g., B2 ≈ 72–94, C1 ≈ 95–120).

4. Score Comparisons & Correlations

A concordance study by Michigan Language Assessment aligned MET scores with IELTS Academic bands, finding clear overlaps.

For example:

  • MET 62–66 corresponds to IELTS 7.0
  • MET 71–75 corresponds to IELTS 8.0.

The study also reported strong correlations between MET and IELTS—especially total scores (r = 0.872), with Reading (r ≈ 0.751) and Writing (r ≈ 0.642) showing moderate to strong alignment.

Summary Comparison Table

Feature

MET

IELTS

TOEFL iBT
Purpose General proficiency (A2–C1) Academic/immigration Academic-focused
Flexibility Modular, computer-based, 24/7 Paper/computer, scheduled Internet-based, scheduled
Scoring 0–80 per skill, CEFR mapped Band 1–9, CEFR mapped 0–120, CEFR equivalences
Recognition Globally recognized, incl. visas Widely accepted Most widely accepted
MET vs IELTS Scores Concordance provided N/A Mapped via external studies

Final Thoughts

The MET offers flexibility, accessibility, and streamlined results with solid CEFR alignment—making it an excellent choice for test-takers seeking convenience without sacrificing recognition. Meanwhile, IELTS and TOEFL remain staple tests, historically preferred for university admissions globally.

Choosing among them depends on your goals, timeline, and comfort with formats.