the language program. Accordingly, proper use of the MLAT would be to use it as one part of a more comprehensive assessment of the learner, or to use the test in a setting where motivation is known to be uniformly high. In response to role of motivation in successful learning, Paul Pimsleur developed the Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB), which includes a section that assesses motivation in examinees. Another issue taken with using language aptitude tests like the MLAT is that they are not directly helpful to individuals who are required to learn a language regardless of their language learning abilities. According to John Carroll, language learning aptitude is relatively stable over an individual's lifetime, so if an individual scores poorly on the MLAT, there is no proven method to increase their language learning aptitude if they must learn a language. One way the MLAT could be helpful in this situation is as an indicator that more language learning time will be needed relative to someone who received a higher score on the MLAT. It can also assist them by showing which learning strategies that they use best. Similarly, level of difficulty of the language can be considered when selecting those wish to learn a foreign language, i.e. the more difficult the language the greater the need for higher language learning aptitude. The age of the test along with its norms is another area of concern. The test was developed in 1953-58 and the norms were calculated with data collected in 1958. The validity of the MLAT has also been challenged due to changes in teaching methods since the 1950s. The grammar translation method was likely used with norming subjects in high schools and universities, while government employees and soldiers in intensive language programs focused on oral language skills. Thus, learners included in the validation represented two quite different methods of instruction. The grammar translation method used in high schools and universities has been replaced by more communicative teaching methods. In 1998, research conducted by Madeline Ehrman, Director of Research and Evaluation at the U.S. Foreign Service Institute, where adult government employees are enrolled in a communication oriented intensive language program, produced validity coefficients at approximately the same levels as the original validity coefficients from 1958. This supports the validity of the test as a predictor of success under communicative language teaching. Also, research by Leila Ranta (Associate Professor of