From What Age Should Children Take the Eiken? — What Taking the Test Means and Points to Watch
Why this topic is on parents’ minds
When you work on early English education, a question always comes up at some point: “Maybe it’s time to have our child take the Eiken?”
As we laid out in our related article, Does early English education really work?, there is a research consensus on English exposure from early childhood that “excessive expectations are a mistake, but within a range the child enjoys, it can be a good experience.” On top of that, when you send your child to an English conversation school or read picture books at home, it is natural for parents to start feeling, “I want to know objectively how much my child has learned.”
The Eiken is the most accessible measure as such “visible results.” A tangible result remains in the form of a certificate, the grades work as steps that let you feel progress, and it also leads to entries on school report documents for junior high school entrance exams and returnee admissions.
On the other hand, taking the test at a young age involves several points to be careful about, both from research and in practice. This article aims not at the either-or of “should we have our child take it or not,” but at laying out “how to approach it so that the Eiken works as a plus for the child’s English growth.”
How Eiken grades correspond to the CEFR
First, let’s confirm where the grades themselves stand, using official materials. The “Comparison Table of Qualifications and Proficiency Tests with the CEFR” maps each test, including the Eiken, to the levels of the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages), an international standard.
Roughly organized, it looks like this.
- Eiken Grade 5 → CEFR A1 (around beginning junior high school level; can understand greetings and basic instructions)
- Eiken Grade 4 → CEFR A1 (around middle junior high school level; vocabulary for simple everyday conversation)
- Eiken Grade 3 → CEFR A2 (around junior high school graduation level; can express familiar topics in simple English)
- Eiken Grade Pre-2 → CEFR A2 to B1 (around middle high school level; can communicate in everyday situations)
- Eiken Grade 2 → CEFR B1 to B2 (around high school graduation level; can handle social topics)
- Eiken Grade Pre-1 → CEFR B2 (around intermediate university level; can handle abstract discussion)
- Eiken Grade 1 → CEFR C1 (around advanced university level; can use the language at a high level)
Young children and elementary school children most often take Grades 5, 4, and 3. Because Grade 3 is the first to include an interview (speaking), this is one big step up.
The Eiken Foundation also has a separate test for preschool and elementary school children, “Eiken Jr.” (formerly the Children’s Eiken). It is a listening-centered test whose results are given not as pass/fail but as a percentage of correct answers, with three levels—Bronze, Silver, and Gold—and it is positioned as a way to make visible “how familiar the child is with English.” In this article, “Eiken” basically refers to the main tests from Grade 5 up, but at a young age there are many cases where Eiken Jr. is a better fit in terms of load.
Benefits of taking it at a young age
Taking on the Eiken at a young age does have meaningful effects for both parent and child. Let’s look at them in order.
(1) Seeing a goal gives learning a rhythm
English learning in early childhood can easily fall into a state of “just continuing somehow” or “not knowing how far the child has gotten.” When there is a goal in the form of a test date, working backward from it—such as “one book of past papers in the next 2 months”—gives the efforts at home a concrete rhythm.
(2) The experience of passing contributes to the child’s self-efficacy
Passing Grade 5 or Grade 4, which are especially easy to obtain at a young age, can become a positive experience for the child: “I’m glad I did it” and “I want to try hard next time too.” This has value not only for English learning but also as an experience of self-efficacy: “the results of effort take shape.”
(3) Objective evaluation by a third party
Within the home or a school alone, it is hard to judge objectively how strong the child’s English is. The Eiken serves as a standardized external evaluation and as material for understanding where the child stands now. In thinking about “what to strengthen,” it also helps that scores by area are given for reading, listening, and (from Grade 3 up) speaking and writing.
(4) Use in junior high school entrance exams, transfers, returnee admissions, and so on
This is separate from English ability itself, but as a practical benefit, the Eiken is the basis for extra points on school reports or exemptions from English exams in many junior high school entrance exams. At some private combined junior and senior high schools, holding Grade Pre-2 or Grade 2, for example, may be an application requirement or a condition for preferential treatment. Whether or not you make this the goal in your family’s path planning, it is a fact that it is a card that “is unlikely to hurt to have.”
Risks of taking it at a young age
On the flip side of the benefits, there are also risks to watch with taking it at a young age. The Eiken Foundation itself does not actively publicize these, so they are points for parents to keep in mind.
(1) If it leans toward “test preparation,” free output decreases
The Eiken, especially at the lower grades, is a paper test centered on multiple choice (mark sheets). The further preparation goes, the more study time is taken up by the skill of “choosing the right answer from four options.” On the other hand, what really matters in English learning at a young age is free output that involves interaction, such as singing, saying things aloud, moving the body, and reading picture books together.
Assessing Young Language Learners, a research book that comprehensively discusses language assessment of young learners
repeatedly points out that in language assessment for children, “behavior for the test” and “real language use” tend to drift apart. McKay argues that the younger the learner, the better continuous assessment through performance tasks and portfolios captures the real picture of the learner, and that a one-off multiple-choice test easily swings toward either underestimation or overestimation.
In other words, if you chase only Eiken scores, there is a risk of ending up in a state that drifts from the original goal: “can answer mark sheets, but isn’t good at free spoken conversation.”
(2) Fatigue from adapting to the paper test format itself
For preschoolers and children in the lower grades of elementary school, taking a long desk-based test with concentration is itself a big burden. Even Grade 5 has 25 minutes of written test and about 20 minutes of listening, and at Grade 3 the time grows to 50 minutes of written test, about 25 minutes of listening, and an interview on a separate day.
There are also cases where children cannot show their full ability not because of English ability itself, but because of a lack of test literacy, such as “holding a pencil and filling in the marks” and “sitting quietly in the test room.” This is a variable unrelated to the essence of English learning, but one that affects the results on the day.
(3) The burden on the family of accompanying the child
Eiken preparation at a young age is in practice almost entirely accompanied by the parents at home. Listening to the past-paper audio together, explaining the questions the child got wrong, role-playing the interview—this is a considerable investment of time and energy for parents.
You need to stop regularly and check whether what was supposed to be “the child’s own challenge” has at some point slid into “a project for the parent’s sense of achievement.”
(4) An imbalance in listening and speaking
The Eiken claims to measure 4 skills (reading, listening, writing, speaking), but the treatment is uneven depending on the grade. Grades 5 and 4 have no interview (a speaking test was introduced from 2016, but it does not affect pass/fail), and an interview is first required from Grade 3 on. At the stage of aiming only for Grades 5 and 4 at a young age, structurally, there are few chances to evaluate speaking.
When “Eiken preparation” becomes the center at home, the child’s English exposure can become skewed toward multiple-choice reading and listening, and time spent using the mouth relatively decreases. For real English growth, this is not a desirable direction.
From what age is it realistic to consider it?
Based on all this, here is a realistic guide in answer to the frequently asked question “From what age?” Please read this not as “it must absolutely be like this,” but as a guide that depends on how the child is doing and the family’s situation.
Preschool (ages 3 to 6)
Preschool age
The main Eiken is basically premature. At an age when children are not yet adapted to desk-based tests, forcing them to take it carries a bigger risk of creating resistance to English itself. At this stage, a listening-centered, almost playful test such as 'Eiken Jr. Bronze/Silver' is more reasonable in terms of load.
Lower elementary (ages 7 to 9)
Lower elementary
Grades 5 and 4 are a realistic option if the child has had enough English exposure and shows interest. However, 'the ability to pass' and 'time to get used to the test format' are different things, and care is needed so that life does not center on practicing past papers. Eiken Jr. Gold, or starting from Grade 5, is reasonable.
Middle elementary and up (age 10 and up)
Upper elementary and above
In terms of cognitive development too, it becomes easier to adapt to desk-based tests and to handle the interviews from Grade 3 on. It is also an age when using it for junior high school entrance exams comes into view. Even here, though, it is important to put the child's own pace first so that 'moving up a grade' does not become the goal in itself.
To repeat, this does not at all mean “if they don’t take it at this age, they will fall behind.” Rather, getting a grade at a young age does not in itself have the power to guarantee future English ability. What matters is choosing, when you decide to take the test, a grade and a timing that put no strain on the child relative to their cognitive development and accumulated English exposure.
Test preparation and “real English ability” — the BICS/CALP viewpoint
The most important theoretical framework for thinking about the Eiken at a young age is the BICS/CALP distinction by Jim Cummins, a Canadian language education researcher.
- BICS (Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills): communication ability, supported by context, needed for everyday conversation. Greetings, simple instructions, shopping, interactions while playing, and so on. When children are placed in a second-language environment, it is said to be acquired in roughly 1 to 2 years.
- CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency): language ability with little contextual support, needed to deal with abstract and academic content. Reading and understanding textbooks, giving logical explanations, discussing abstract concepts, and so on. Acquiring CALP is said to take 5 to 7 years or more.
Applying this to the context of the Eiken, it can be organized as follows.
- The vocabulary and grammar of Grades 5 and 4 are content leaning toward BICS. The questions mainly deal with everyday situations.
- From Grade 3 on, content leaning toward CALP (reading narrative texts, listening on social topics, somewhat abstract questions in the interview) gradually increases.
- At Grades Pre-2 and 2, abstract themes such as social issues, the environment, and technology appear in earnest.
What becomes visible from this is that there is a considerable distance between “the grades that are easy to obtain at a young age” and “CALP as real English ability.” Passing Grade 5 or Grade 4 does not necessarily mean that the child’s English has reached the stage of “being able to think in English.”
Please understand this not as denying the value of the Eiken, but as a guide to avoid oversimplifying it as “passing = being good at English.”
Preparation if you choose to take it
If you still decide “let’s have our child take it,” here are practical points for working on it while keeping the burden on the child down.
(1) A little past-paper practice “just before the test” is enough
For young children, there is basically no need to build up past-paper practice from more than six months ahead. Rather, a long period of being steeped in past papers reduces English learning to “the task of filling in the correct answer on a mark sheet.”
We recommend working on 1 to 2 sets of past papers, 2 to 4 weeks before the test, together with a parent, for the purpose of “getting used to the test format.” The rest of the time, continuing the habits of picture books, songs, and conversation that you have kept up so far ends up better supporting overall English ability.
(2) Watch the balance between reading and listening
Grades 5 and 4 structurally tend to give somewhat more weight to reading (vocabulary and grammar), but for young children listening is often easier to work on. For preparation at home, a realistic use is to not lean only toward reading, and to play the past-paper listening audio like background music.
(3) From Grade 3 on, separate interview preparation is needed
From Grade 3 on, after passing the first stage (written test and listening), there is an interview (second stage) on a separate day. It is a dialogue format conducted one-on-one with an adult, in English only, and for young children, nervousness on the day becomes a big variable.
A standard way to prepare at home is to copy the format of past interviews and practice through role-play with a parent playing the examiner. Rather than having the child answer in perfect English, behaviors such as “not going silent even if you don’t understand the question, and asking ‘Pardon?’” and “answering in your own words, even briefly” make more difference in the real test.
(4) Put physical condition and feelings on the day first
This is not a technical matter, but it is the most important point. If the child is unwell on the test day or feels strong anxiety, they will not show their real ability. Keeping an atmosphere in which a parent can always offer the option “we’ll skip this time; next time is fine” protects the child’s willingness to take on challenges in the long run.
The choice of “not taking the Eiken” is also respected
Here, let’s stop once and confirm something.
Choosing not to take the Eiken at a young age is perfectly fine, according to research too.
Looking at materials such as the English Proficiency Survey (FY2017), there is no basis for saying that whether a child obtained the Eiken before school has a decisive effect on English attainment in junior high and high school. Rather, as Ortega (2009) lays out, what determines long-term growth in a second language are more foundational factors such as the cumulative quantity and quality of exposure, motivation, and the development of the native language.
There is no need at all to feel anxious that “we haven’t had our child take the Eiken.” Rather:
- Whether the child continues to have positive feelings toward English
- Whether there is a habit of engaging with English at home at a frequency that puts no strain on anyone
- Whether the development of Japanese (the native language) is not being squeezed
These have a far bigger influence in the long run. The Eiken is only one option, not a required checkpoint.
How parents engage — talk about the “process” rather than the “result”
Another thing that matters with the Eiken at a young age is how parents react to pass/fail results.
Being overjoyed if the child passes and looking disappointed if they fail—this is a natural reaction, but for the child it carries the risk of creating a cognitive frame in which “English learning = something that pleases or disappoints my parents.”
What we recommend is, even before the results come out, putting the “process” into concrete words and acknowledging it.
- “Keeping up listening every day must have been really hard.”
- “In the interview role-play, you went quiet at first, but by the end you answered in your own words.”
- “At the test site, you sat properly all the way to the end.”
Pass/fail is only one part of an external evaluation, and more than that, the time and effort the child built up to get there have the essential value.
Watching my older child prepare for the Eiken, since he was enjoying it, I ended up wanting him to take on the next grade too. But he gradually started saying, “I don’t want to do it anymore”…
That sign is important. Once the Eiken gets going at a young age, the load of preparation increases exponentially with each grade. Stopping once and deliberately creating “a period of not taking the next grade” is also a wise choice for staying with English for a long time.
But since we’ve come this far, it also feels like a waste…
I understand that feeling well. But in many cases, the one who feels “it’s a waste” is not the child but the parent. The child coming to dislike English itself would be a far bigger lost opportunity. If, during the period when grades are on hold, he has time to enjoy picture books and his favorite English cartoons, his internal English ability keeps growing just fine.
I’ve reconsidered—getting grades isn’t the goal in itself.
“Within a range the child enjoys” — where to land
Depending on how you use it, the Eiken can be a good milestone that supports a child’s English learning.
- The child themself says “I want to try taking it”
- Past-paper practice is not squeezing everyday English exposure at home
- Parents do not over-dramatize pass/fail results
- Even when there are periods when grades are on hold, the habit of English exposure at home continues
If these 4 points are met, the Eiken works as a plus for the child’s English learning. On the other hand, if any of them is breaking down, slowing the pace of taking the test a little, or skipping it for now, is wiser in the long run.
Reading it together with our related articles Does early English education really work?, English conversation schools: what should you look for?, and English picture books: what to choose and how? (Japanese) should make the overall map of “what to aim for, where to start, and how to continue” more three-dimensional.
In the end, what should be the basis for deciding whether to take the Eiken or not?
The most important thing is “whether it’s within a range the child enjoys.” If test preparation has become a heavy burden on the family, or the child seems to be drifting away from English itself, it’s fine to skip the test for now. On the other hand, if the child is interested and seems able to take it on with preparation that doesn’t strain anyone, it becomes a good experience.
So it’s better not to use “because people around us are taking it” as a basis for deciding.
That’s right. An Eiken grade doesn’t guarantee a child’s English growth. What guarantees it is a relationship with English that can continue for a long time, enjoyably, and without strain. If you can use the Eiken as one tool that supports that relationship, you can keep just the right distance from it.
I feel the pressure lifting. I’ll start by reconsidering whether my child is enjoying it.
Research details
Primary sourcesStudy design: Official information from the organization that runs the test (Can-do lists for each grade, question formats, test times, test-taker statistics)
Scope: Each Eiken grade from Grade 5 to Grade 1. The number of test takers is on the scale of about 4 million in total a year, and it has been officially announced that the number of test takers of elementary school age and younger has been increasing in recent years.
Main results: The Can-do list for each grade publishes the language-use situations expected for each grade. Grade 5 is “around beginning junior high school level; can express things about family and hobbies in simple English,” and Grade 3 is the first to introduce an interview (second stage), at the level of “can state simple opinions about familiar matters.” There is no minimum age to take it, but the Eiken Foundation consistently advises “a grade suited to the child’s age, within a range the child can take on without strain.”
Limitations: It is official information, and independent external verification is always needed for how grades correspond to actual English proficiency. The Can-do lists are only a “guide,” and not everyone who passes can necessarily use the language as described.
Study design: Official materials by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology mapping each test to the CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages)
Scope: Major English tests, including the Eiken, TOEFL, TOEIC, IELTS, Cambridge English, and GTEC.
Main results: Eiken Grades 5 and 4 were deemed to correspond to CEFR A1, Grade 3 to A2, Grade Pre-2 to A2 to B1, Grade 2 to B1 to B2, Grade Pre-1 to B2, and Grade 1 to C1. The aim was to connect the difficulty of each test with the international standard, with the use of external tests in university admissions in mind.
Limitations: It is only a “comparison table” and does not guarantee that each test’s passing score fully matches each CEFR level. Note that the weight given to each skill differs by test, and that there is a range between passing and reaching a CEFR level.
Study design: A standardized survey of English proficiency in 4 skills (reading, listening, writing, speaking) for 3rd-year junior high school students and 3rd-year high school students nationwide
Participants: About 60,000 3rd-year junior high school students and about 60,000 3rd-year high school students (random sampling)
Main results: In both 3rd-year junior high and 3rd-year high school, there was a tendency for average scores in writing and speaking to be lower than in reading and listening. Findings such as a majority of 3rd-year junior high students reaching CEFR A1 level and 3rd-year high school students falling short of the target (50% at A2 or above) showed that developing the 4 skills in balance is a challenge.
Limitations: It is a cross-sectional survey, and this survey cannot test a causal relationship between English learning experiences before school and in elementary school (including obtaining the Eiken) and attainment in junior high and high school. However, it serves as reference material for the interpretation that “obtaining the Eiken at a young age does not directly guarantee attainment in junior high and high school.”
Study design: A theoretical summary of the distinction between BICS (Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills) and CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency), and a review of the current state based on accumulated empirical research
Scope: A body of research mainly on immigrant children and second-language learners in North America.
Main results: Children placed in a second-language environment acquire BICS (everyday conversation level) in roughly 1 to 2 years, while CALP (academic and abstract language use) takes 5 to 7 years or more. There is a large qualitative gap between the state of “appearing conversationally fluent” and the state of “being able to keep up with subject learning.” This distinction is crucial when thinking about evaluating and supporting learners.
Limitations: The concept was originally proposed in the context of immigrant children, so care is needed when applying it directly to an English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) environment. However, its basic implication—“the difference between visible fluency and academic depth”—also serves as a useful guide for thinking about the relationship between test preparation and real English ability in an EFL environment.
Study design: A research book that comprehensively discusses language assessment for young language learners (roughly ages 5 to 12)
Scope: Language tests and assessment practices for young learners in countries around the world, and the research findings behind them.
Main results: It argues that the same framework as for adults must not be applied as is to language assessment for children. The younger the learner, the more easily the effects of attention span, metacognition, and familiarity with tests show up in results, and a one-off multiple-choice test has difficulty capturing the real picture. Assessment that combines performance tasks, portfolios, and continuous observation by teachers captures young learners’ language development more validly.
Limitations: It is a comprehensive research book, not a validation of any particular test (such as the Eiken). However, its point that “multiple-choice tests at a young age easily swing toward either underestimation or overestimation” serves as a basis for interpreting results carefully when taking the Eiken at a young age.
Study design: A comprehensive introduction to and overview of second language acquisition (SLA) research
Scope: SLA research as a whole (age, the quality and quantity of exposure, motivation, affect, social environment, development of the native language, etc.)
Main results: What determines long-term growth in a second language are combined factors such as the cumulative quantity and quality of exposure, motivation, the state of development of the native language, and social interaction, more than the age of starting itself. Short-term measures such as test scores capture only a small part of a learner’s overall language use.
Limitations: It is an introductory book and does not present new data. However, it is widely adopted internationally as a standard reference in the field of SLA.