Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer
Home / Common European Framework Reading Compare to Grade Level

Common European Framework Reading Compare to Grade Level

Post a Comment

Language cess rubric

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Instruction, Assessment,[ane] abbreviated in English as CEFR or CEF or CEFRL, is a guideline used to describe achievements of learners of foreign languages across Europe and, increasingly, in other countries. The CEFR is as well intended to brand information technology easier for educational institutions and employers to evaluate the language qualifications of candidates to education access or employment. Its chief aim is to provide a method of learning, teaching and assessing that applies to all languages in Europe.

It was put together by the Council of Europe as the primary office of the project "Language Learning for European Citizenship" between 1989 and 1996. In November 2001, a European Union Council Resolution recommended using the CEFR to set up systems of validation of language ability. The vi reference levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2) are becoming widely accepted equally the European standard for grading an private's language proficiency.

Development [edit]

An intergovernmental symposium in 1991 titled "Transparency and Coherence in Linguistic communication Learning in Europe: Objectives, Evaluation, Certification" held by the Swiss Federal Regime in the Swiss municipality of Rüschlikon constitute the need for a mutual European framework for languages to ameliorate the recognition of language qualifications and help teachers co-operate. A project followed to develop linguistic communication-level classifications for certification to be recognised across Europe.[2]

Every bit a result of the symposium, the Swiss National Scientific discipline Foundation set up a projection to develop levels of proficiency, to lead on to the creation of a "European Linguistic communication Portfolio" – certification in language ability which can be used across Europe.

A preliminary version of the Manual for Relating Linguistic communication Examinations to the Mutual European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) was published in 2003. This typhoon version was piloted in a number of projects, which included linking a single examination to the CEFR, linking suites of exams at different levels and national studies by exam boards and research institutes. Practitioners and academics shared their experiences at a colloquium in Cambridge in 2007 and the airplane pilot instance studies and findings were published in Studies in Language Testing (SiLT).[3] The findings from the airplane pilot projects then informed the Manual revision project during 2008–2009.

Theoretical background [edit]

The CEFR divides general competences in knowledge, skills, and existential competence with detail communicative competences in linguistic competence, sociolinguistic competence and pragmatic competence. This division does not exactly lucifer previously well-known notions of communicative competence, merely correspondences amongst them can exist made.[4]

The CEFR has three principal dimensions: language activities, the domains in which the linguistic communication activities occur, and the competencies on which a person draws when they engage in them.[5]

Language activities [edit]

The CEFR distinguishes amid four kinds of language activities: reception (listening and reading), production (spoken and written), interaction (spoken and written) and mediation (translating and interpreting).[5]

Domains [edit]

General and detail communicative competences are developed by producing or receiving texts in diverse contexts under diverse atmospheric condition and constraints. These contexts correspond to diverse sectors of social life that the CEFR calls domains. Four wide domains are distinguished: educational, occupational, public and personal. These largely stand for to register.[ citation needed ]

Competences [edit]

A language user can develop various degrees of competence in each of these domains and to help draw them, the CEFR has provided a set up of six Common Reference Levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2).[ citation needed ]

Common reference levels [edit]

The Common European Framework divides learners into three broad divisions that can each be further divided into two levels; for each level, it describes what a learner is supposed to be able to practise in reading, listening, speaking and writing. The post-obit tabular array indicates these levels. A more thorough description of each level, with criteria for listening, reading, speaking and writing, is available on the Internet.[vi]

Level group Level Description
A
Basic user 		A1
Breakthrough
  • Tin sympathise and use familiar everyday expressions and very bones phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type.
  • Can innovate themselves and others and tin can ask and reply questions about personal details such as where they alive, people they know and things they have.
  • Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and conspicuously and is prepared to assistance.
A2
Waystage
  • Can understand sentences and ofttimes used expressions related to areas of near firsthand relevance (e.1000. very basic personal and family unit information, shopping, local geography, employment).
  • Tin can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct commutation of information on familiar and routine matters.
  • Tin describe in uncomplicated terms aspects of their background, firsthand environment and matters in areas of firsthand need.
B
Independent user 		B1
Threshold
  • Can empathise the main points of articulate standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in piece of work, school, leisure, etc.
  • Tin can deal with most situations likely to ascend while travelling in an area where the language is spoken.
  • Tin produce unproblematic continued text on topics that are familiar or of personal involvement.
  • Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes and ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans.
B2
Vantage
  • Tin can empathise the chief ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in their field of specialisation.
  • Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party.
  • Can produce articulate, detailed text on a broad range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options.
C
Proficient user 		C1
Advanced
  • Tin can understand a broad range of demanding, longer clauses and recognise implicit significant.
  • Can express ideas fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions.
  • Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes.
  • Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on circuitous subjects, showing controlled utilise of organisational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices.
C2
Mastery
  • Tin can understand with ease about everything heard or read.
  • Can summarise information from dissimilar spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation.
  • Can express themselves spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in the most complex situations.

These descriptors can apply to any of the languages spoken in Europe and at that place are translations in many languages.

Relationship with duration of learning process [edit]

Educational bodies for diverse languages have offered estimates for the amount of report needed to attain levels in the relevant language.

Torso Language Cumulative hours of study to attain level
B1 B2 C1 C2
Goethe-Institut German 350–650 600–800 800–one,000 1,000
Alliance française French 360–400 560–650 810–950 ane,060–1,200

Certification and teaching ecosystem enabled by the CEFR [edit]

Multiple organisations have been created to serve as an umbrella for language schools and certification businesses that claim compatibility with the CEFR. For example, the European Association for Language Testing and Assessment (EALTA) is an initiative funded by the European Customs[vii] to promote the CEFR and best practices in delivering professional language training. The Association of Linguistic communication Testers in Europe (ALTE) is a consortium of bookish organisations that aims at standardising cess methods.[8] EAQUALS (Evaluation and Accreditation of Quality in Language Services) is an international clan of institutions and organisations involved in language education, active throughout Europe and following the CEFR.[9]

In France, the Ministry for Education has created a government-mandated certificate chosen CLES, which formalises the utilize of the CEFR in language teaching programmes in French higher education institutions.[10]

In Frg, Telc, a non-profit bureau, is the federal authorities's exclusive partner for language tests taken at the finish of the integration courses for migrants, following the CEFR standards.[11]

Comparisons between CEFR and other scales [edit]

General scales [edit]

Studies have addressed correspondence with the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines and the United States ILR scale.

For convenience, the post-obit abbreviations will be used for the ACTFL levels:

  • NL/NM/NH – Novice Low/Mid/Loftier
  • IL/IM/IH – Intermediate Depression/Mid/High
  • AL/AM/AH – Advanced Low/Mid/High
  • Due south – Superior
  • D – Distinguished (a name sometimes used for levels four and four+ of the ILR scale instead of including them within Superior)[ tone ]

The following table summarises various proposed equivalences betwixt CEFR and ACTFL:

CEFR Correspondance with ACTFL
Martínez, 2008 [12] Tschirner, 2005 [13] Buitrago, 2006 [14]
<A1 NL, NM
A1 NH NH NL
A2 IL, IM IM NM
B1 IM, IH IH IL
B2 IH, AL AM IM, IH
C1 AM, AH AH AL, AM, AH
C2 AH, S S S

In a console discussion at the Osaka University of Foreign Studies, one of the coauthors of the CEFR, Brian Due north, stated that a "sensible hypothesis" would be for C2 to correspond to "Distinguished," C1 to "Superior," B2 to "Advanced-mid" and B1 to "Intermediate-high" in the ACTFL system.[xv]

This agrees with a table published by the American Academy Heart of Provence giving the following correspondences:[16]

CEFR ILR ACTFL
A1 0/0+ NL, NM, NH
A2 ane IL, IM
B1 1+ IH
B2 2/two+ AL, AM, AH
C1 3/3+ S
C2 4/four+ D

Notwithstanding, a comparison betwixt the ILR cocky-cess grids (reading,[17] speaking,[18] listening [19]) and the CEFR cess grid [20] could suggest a different equivalence:[21]

CEFR ILR ACTFL
A1 0/1 NL, NM, NH
A2 i+ IL, IM
B1 2/2+ IH
B2 3/3+ AL, AM, AH
C1 4 S
C2 4+ D

A report by Buck, Papageorgiou and Platzek[22] addresses the correspondence betwixt the difficulty of test items under the CEFR and ILR standards. The nigh common ILR levels for items of given CEFR difficulty were as follows:

  • Reading—A1: 1, A2: i, B1: one+, B2: ii+, C1: three
  • Listening—A1: 0+/one, A2: 1, B1: 1+, B2: 2, C1: 2+ (at least)[23]

Canada increasingly uses the CEFR in a few domains. CEFR-compatible exams such every bit the DELF/DALF (French) and the DELE (Spanish) are administered. Universities increasingly construction their courses around the CEFR levels. Larry Vandergrift of the University of Ottawa has proposed Canadian adoption of the CEFR in his report Proposal for a Common Framework of Reference for Languages for Canada published by Heritage Canada.[24] [25] This report contains a comparison of the CEFR to other standards in utilise in Canada and proposes an equivalence table.

CEFR ILR ACTFL NB OPS[26] CLB PSC PSC[27]
A1 0/0+/one Novice (Low/Mid/Loftier) Unrated/0+/1 one/2 A
A2 i+ Intermediate (Low/Mid/High) one+/2 three/iv B
B1 2 Avant-garde Low 2+ five/six C
B2 two+ Advanced Mid 3 7/8
C1 3/3+ Advanced High 3+ 9/10
C2 4 Superior 4 11/12
C2+ 4+/5

The resulting correspondence between the ILR and ACTFL scales disagrees with the generally accepted one.[28] The ACTFL standards were developed so that Novice, Intermediate, Avant-garde and Superior would correspond to 0/0+, 1/1+, 2/2+ and 3/3+, respectively on the ILR scale.[29] As well, the ILR and NB OPS scales do not represent despite the fact that the latter was modelled on the former.[25]

A more recent certificate by Macdonald and Vandergrift[30] estimates the post-obit correspondences (for oral ability) between the Public Service Commission levels and the CEFR levels:

PSC CEFR
A A2
B B1/B2
C B2/C1

Language schools may also suggest their own equivalence tables. For case, the Vancouver English Center provides a comprehensive equivalence table betwixt the various forms of the TOEFL test, the Cambridge exam, the VEC level organisation, and the CEFR.[31]

Language-specific scales [edit]

Linguistic communication Certificate A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2
Multiple European Consortium for the Certificate of Attainment in Modern Languages. ECL exams can be taken in English, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Polish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Slovak, Russian, Spanish, Croatian, Czech, and Hebrew. - A2 B1 B2 C1 -
UNIcert UNIcert I UNIcert Two UNIcert 3 UNIcert IV
TELC A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2
ALTE level Breakthrough level Level 1 Level ii Level 3 Level 4 Level five
Basque IVAP-HAEE HE ane - IVAP-HAEE HE ii - IVAP-HAEE HE 3 - IVAP-HAEE HE 4 - IVAP-HAEE
HABE Lehenengo maila – HABE Bigarren maila – HABE Hirugarren maila – HABE Laugarren maila – HABE
EGA Euskararen Gaitasun Agiria
Catalan Catalan Language Certificates Bàsic-A2 Elemental-B1 Intermedi-B2 Suficiència-C1 Superior-C2
Simtest A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2
Mandarin Chinese Chinese Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi (HSK)[32]

(Levels according to French and High german associations)

HSK Level 1

HSK Level 2

HSK Level three

HSK Level 4

HSK Level four

HSK Level 5

HSK Level v

HSK Level 6

HSK Level 6
Examination of Chinese As A Foreign Language (TOCFL) (Taiwan) TOCFL Level 1 TOCFL Level 2 TOCFL Level 3 TOCFL Level four TOCFL Level v TOCFL Level vi
Welsh WJEC Defnyddio'r Gymraeg[33] Mynediad (Entry) Sylfaen (Foundation) Canolradd (Intermediate) Uwch (Avant-garde) - -
Czech Czech Language Certificate Exam (CCE)[34] CCE-A1 CCE-A2 CCE-B1 CCE-B2 CCE-C1 -
Danish Prøve i Dansk (Danish Linguistic communication Exam)[35] Danskprøve A1 Prøve i Dansk 1 Prøve i Dansk 2 Prøve i Dansk 3 Studieprøven
Dutch CNaVT - Certificaat Nederlands als Vreemde Taal (Document of Dutch as Foreign Language)[36] Profile tourist and breezy language proficiency (PTIT) Profile societal language proficiency (PMT) Contour professional language proficiency (PPT), Contour language proficiency college education (PTHO) Profile academic linguistic communication proficiency (PAT)
Inburgeringsexamen (Integration examination for immigrants from exterior the EU) Pre-examination at embassy of habitation country Examination in kingdom of the netherlands
Staatsexamen Nederlands als tweede taal NT2 (State Examination Dutch as second language NT2)[37] NT2 programma I NT2 programma II
English language Anglia Examinations Preliminary Elementary Intermediate Advanced Proficiency Masters
TrackTest[38] A1 (Beginner) A2 (Uncomplicated) B1 (Pre-Intermediate) B2 (Intermediate) C1 (Upper-Intermediate) C2 (Avant-garde)
TOELS: Wheebox Test of English Language Skills[39] 11 (Beginner) 20 (Pre-Intermediate) 25 (Intermediate) 30 (Graduate) 33 (Avant-garde)
iTEP[40] 0–1.ix 2–2.4 2.5-iii.4 three.v-4.4 four.5-5.four v.v-half-dozen
IELTS[41] [42] [43] 2.0 3.0 iii.five-v.five (iii.5 is the margin) 5.5-seven (5.5 is the margin) seven-viii (7 is the margin) 8.0-nine.0 (8.0 is the margin)
TOEIC Listening & Reading Test[44] 60-105 listening
lx-110 reading 		110-270 (listening)
115-270 (reading) 		275-395 (listening)
275-380 (reading) 		400-485 (listening)
385-450 (reading) 		490-495 (listening)
455-495 (reading)
TOEIC Speaking & Writing Test[44] l-fourscore speaking
30-lx writing 		90-110 (speaking)
seventy-110 (writing) 		120-150 (speaking)
120-140 (writing) 		160-170 (speaking)
150-170 (writing) 		180-200 (speaking)
180-200 (writing)
Versant 26-35 36-46 47-57 58-68 69-78 79-fourscore
Speexx Language Assessment Center 10-19 20-29 30-49 50-79 fourscore-89 90-100
Duolingo English Test [45] 10-twenty 25-55 sixty-85 90-115 120-140 145-160
Countersign English Tests 2.0 - 2.5 3.0 - three.5 iv.0 - 5.0 v.five - 6.5 7.0 or above
TOEFL (IBT)[46] x-15 (speaking)
7-12 (writing) 		42-71 (full)
four-17 (reading)
ix-16 (listening)
sixteen-19 (speaking)
13-sixteen (writing) 		72-94 (total)
18-23 (reading)
17-21 (listening)
20-24 (speaking)
17-23 (writing) 		95-120 (full)
24-30 (reading)
22-30 (listening)
25-30 (speaking)
24-30 (writing)
TOEFL ITP[47] 337 460 543 627
TOEFL Junior Standard[48] 225-245 (listening)
210-245 (language form)
210-240 (reading) 		250-285 (listening)
250-275 (language form)
245-275 (reading) 		290-300 (listening)
280-300 (language course)
280-300 (reading)
EF Standard English Exam[49] 1-xxx 31-40 41-fifty 51-sixty 61-70 71-100
City and Guilds[50] Preliminary Access Achiever Communicator Expert Mastery
RQF (UK Merely)[51] Entry Level Level ane Level 2 Level 3 Levels 4-six Level 7-8
Cambridge test[52] A1 Movers A2 Primal B1 Preliminary B2 First C1 Avant-garde C2 Proficiency
Michigan exam[53] MET Go! Basic User (CEFR A1) [54] Michigan English Test (MET) (0 to 39)[55] / MET Become! Elementary User (CEFR A2) [54] Michigan English Exam (MET) (40 to 52)[55] / MET Go! Intermediate User (CEFR B1) [54] ECCE[56] / Michigan English Test (MET) (53 to 63)[55] Michigan English language Exam (MET) (64 to 80)[55] ECPE[57]
LanguageCert International ESOL - Listening, Reading, Writing

LanguageCert International ESOL - Speaking

A1 Preliminary
(Entry Level 1) 		A2 Admission
(Entry Level two) 		B1 Achiever
(Entry Level 3) 		B2 Communicator
(Level 1) 		C1 Skilful
(Level 2) 		C2 Mastery
(Level iii)
PTE Academic xxx 43 59 76 85ƒ
PTE Full general (formerly LTE) Level A1 Level 1 Level two Level 3 Level 4 Level v
Trinity College London Integrated Skills in English (ISE) / Graded Examinations in Spoken English (GESE)[58] [59] GESE two ISE 0
GESE 3, iv 		ISE I
GESE five, 6
ISE Two
GESE 7, 8, nine
ISE Three
GESE ten, 11
ISE 4
GESE 12
British Full general Qualifications[lx] [61] GCSE Foundation Tier GCSE College Tier GCE As Level and lower grade A-Level GCE A-Level
Learning Resource Network CEF A1 CEF A2 CEF B1 CEF B2 CEF C1 CEF C2
Eiken (Japanese test of English)[62] five,4,three Pre-ii 2 Pre-1 1
Esperanto Esperanto KER History [one] (Esperanto) A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2
Finnish YKI 1 2 iii 4 5 6
French CIEP / Alliance française diplomas TCF A1 / DELF A1 TCF A2 / DELF A2 / CEFP 1 TCF B1 / DELF B1 / CEFP 2 TCF B2 / DELF B2 / Diplôme de Langue TCF C1 / DALF C1 / DSLCF TCF C2 / DALF C2 / DHEF
Speexx Linguistic communication Assessment Heart ten-19 twenty-29 30-49 50-79 lxxx-89 90-100
Galician Certificado de lingua galega (CELGA)[63] CELGA one CELGA ii CELGA three CELGA 4 CELGA 5
German Goethe-Institut Goethe-Zertifikat A1
Starting time Deutsch 1 		Goethe-Zertifikat A2
Kickoff Deutsch 2 		Goethe-Zertifikat B1
Zertifikat Deutsch (ZD) 		Goethe-Zertifikat B2
Zertifikat Deutsch für den Beruf (ZDfB) 		Goethe-Zertifikat C1
Zentrale Mittelstufenprüfung 		Goethe-Zertifikat C2 - Großes Deutsches Sprachdiplom (GDS)
Zentrale Oberstufenprüfung
Kleines Deutsches Sprachdiplom
Speexx Language Cess Center 10-nineteen 20-29 xxx-49 50-79 80-89 90-100
Österreichisches Sprachdiplom Deutsch A1 ÖSD Zertifikat A1 (ÖSD ZA1) A2 ÖSD Zertifikat A2 (ÖSD ZA2) B1 ÖSD Zertifikat Deutsch Österreich (ÖSD B1 ZDÖ); B1 ÖSD Zertifikat B1 (ZB1) B2 ÖSD Zertifikat B2 (ÖSD ZB2) C1 ÖSD Zertifikat C1 (ÖSD ZC1) C2 ÖSD Zertifikat C2 (ÖSD ZC2); C2 ÖSD Zertifikat C2 / Wirtschaftssprache Deutsch (ÖSD ZC2 / WD)
Deutsch als Fremdsprache in der Wirtschaft (WiDaF)[64] - 0-246 247-495 496-735 736-897 898-990
TestDaF[65] TDN 3—TDN 4[66] TDN 4—TDN 5
Greek Πιστοποίηση Ελληνομάθειας (Certificate of Attainment in Modern Greek)[67] Α1
(Στοιχειώδης Γνώση) 		Α2
(Βασική Γνώση) 		Β1
(Μέτρια Γνώση) 		Β2
(Καλή Γνώση) 		Γ1
(Πολύ Καλή Γνώση) 		Γ2
(Άριστη Γνώση)
Hebrew Ulpan (equally codified by the Rothberg International School) [68] A1.1 Aleph Beginner

A1.2 Aleph Avant-garde

A2 Bet B1 Gimel B2 Dalet C1.1 Hé

C1.ii Vav

C2 Native Speaker
Icelandic Íslenskupróf vegna umsóknar um íslenskan ríkisborgararétt[69] Pass[70]
Italian CELI Impatto ane 2 three 4 v
Speexx Linguistic communication Assessment Heart 10-19 20-29 thirty-49 50-79 80-89 90-100
CILS A1 A2 Uno Due Tre Quattro / DIT C2
PLIDA (Dante Alighieri Society diplomas) PLIDA A1 PLIDA A2 PLIDA B1 PLIDA B2 PLIDA C1 PLIDA C2
Japanese Japanese-Language Proficiency Test (JLPT) JLPT 5 JLPT four JLPT 3 JLPT 2 JLPT one
Japan Foundation Exam for Bones Japanese (JFT-Basic)[71] Laissez passer
Certificate of Japanese as a Foreign Language (J-cert)[72] Due north/A A2.one A2.2 B1 B2 C1 C2
Korean Exam of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK)[73] Level one Level ii Level 3 Level four Level 5 Level 6
Norwegian Norskprøver Norskprøve ane Norskprøve 2 Norskprøve three Bergenstest - Bestått Bergenstest - Godt bestått
Smooth Egzaminy Certyfikatowe z Języka Polskiego jako Obcego[74] B1 (podstawowy) B2 (średni ogólny) C2 (zaawansowany)
Portuguese CAPLE[75] ACESSO CIPLE DEPLE DIPLE DAPLE DUPLE
CELPE-Bras[76] Intermediate Intermediate Superior Intermediate Superior Intermediate Advanced Superior Advanced
Russian ТРКИ – Тест по русскому языку как иностранному (TORFL – Examination of Russian as a Foreign Language)[77] ТЭУ Элементарный уровень ТБУ Базовый уровень ТРКИ-1 (I Cертификационный уровень) (1st Certificate level) ТРКИ-2 ТРКИ-iii ТРКИ-4
Spanish DELE[78] A1 A2 B1 (formerly "Inicial") B2 (formerly "Intermedio") C1 C2 (formerly "Superior")
Speexx Language Assessment Center 10-19 20-29 30-49 50-79 lxxx-89 90-100
LanguageCert USAL esPro BULATS x-19 20-39 twoscore-59 lx-74 75-89 90-100
Swedish TISUS - - - - Pass -
Swedex - A2 B1 B2 - -
YKI 1 2 3 4 5 6
Turkish TYS[79] A1 A2 B1 B2 (55-seventy%) C1 (71-88%) C2 (89-100%)
Luxembourgish Institut National des Langues[80] A2 B1 B2 C1
Ukrainian[81] UMI/ULF - Ukrainian every bit foreign language UMI 1 UMI two UMI three UMI 4 UMI 5 UMI 6

Difficulty in aligning the CEFR with teaching programmes [edit]

Language schools and document bodies evaluate their own equivalences against the framework. Differences of estimation have been establish to exist, for case, with the aforementioned level on the PTE A, TOEFL, and IELTS, and is a cause of argue between exam producers.[82]

Non-Western areas and languages [edit]

The CEFR, initially adult to ease human being mobility and economic growth inside the highly multilingual European Union, has since influenced and been borrowed by various other areas.

Not-Western learners [edit]

In Japan, the adoption of CEFR have been encouraged past academics, institutional actors (MEXT), politicians and business organisation associations, but also by learners themselves.[83] Adoption in Malaysia has also been documented.[84] In Vietnam, adoption of the CEFR have been connected to (1) recent changes in English language language policy, efforts to reform higher education, oriented toward economic opportunities and tendency for administrators to await outwards for domestic solutions.[85]

Noriyuki (2009) observes the "mechanical" reuse of the European framework and concepts past Japanese teachers of more often than not Western languages, missing the recontextualisation part: the need to adapt the conceptual vocabulary to the local language and to accommodate the framework to the local public, its linguistic communication and practices.[86]

Around 2005, the Osaka University of Strange Studies adult a CEFR-inspired projection for its 25 foreign languages, with a transparent and common evaluation approach. While major languages had for long well defined tools for Japanese public, able to guide teachers pedagogy and assessments in a methodic war, this project pushed the adoption of similar practices to smaller languages, as requested past students.[86]

In tardily 2006–2010, the Keio Academy led an ambitious CEFR-inspired "Action Oriented Plurilingual Language Learning Project" to favour multi-campus and inter-languages cooperation in creating teaching materials and assessments systems from kid to university levels.[86] Since 2015, the "Inquiry on Plurilinguistic and Pluricultural Skill Development in Integrated Foreign Language Education" has followed up.[87]

Non-European languages [edit]

The framework have been translated in 2008 into Chinese.[88] In 2011, French sinologist Joël Bellassen suggests the CEFR together with its metalanguage could and should be adapted to distant languages such every bit Chinese, with the necessity to adapt and extend with relevant concepts proper to the new language and its learners.[89] Diverse efforts on adaptation to Chinese language have been lead.[90] [91]

In Japan, Eastward-Asian languages educational activity are largely ignored due to the Japanese society existence mainly oriented toward Western languages educational activity, missing a valuable opportunity for Japanese to directly reach neighbouring countries and for smaller languages to solidify their languages' teaching.[86]

Computer languages [edit]

The CEFR methodology has been extended to describe and evaluate the proficiency of users of programming languages, when the programming action is considered as a language action.[92]

See too [edit]

  • Assessment of Basic Language and Learning Skills
  • European Day of Languages (26 September)
  • ILR or Foreign Service Level language ability measures
  • List of linguistic communication proficiency tests
  • Studies in Language Testing (SiLT)
  • Job-based linguistic communication learning

References [edit]

  1. ^ Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Educational activity, Assessment . Quango of Europe.
  2. ^ Jean-Claude 2010, p. 73.
  3. ^ Martyniuk, Waldemar (eleven November 2010), Studies in Language Testing (volume clarification), vol. 33, UK, ISBN9780521176842 .
  4. ^ Carlos César, Jimenez (2011). El Marco Europeo Común de Referencia para las Lenguas y la comprensión teórica del conocimiento del lenguaje: exploración de una normatividad flexible para emprender acciones educativas (PDF) (Essay). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. p. xi. Archived from the original (PDF) on five August 2019. Retrieved 30 July 2011.
  5. ^ a b "The Mutual European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR)". Quango of Europe. Retrieved 18 September 2015.
  6. ^ "European language levels - Self Assessment Grid". Archived from the original on 28 January 2017. Too available equally PDF.
  7. ^ "European Association for Language Testing and Cess". EALTA. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
  8. ^ "Association of Linguistic communication Testers in Europe". ALTE. Retrieved eighteen July 2014.
  9. ^ "EAquals— Our aims". EAquals. Archived from the original on 14 July 2014. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
  10. ^ "Certificate de Compétences en Langues de l'Enseignement Supérieur". Spiral. Archived from the original on 18 May 2007. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
  11. ^ "The European Language Certificate". telc. Retrieved 18 July 2014.
  12. ^ Baztán, Alfonso Martínez (2008). La evaluación oral: una equivalencia entre las guidelines de ACTFL y algunas escalas del MCER (PDF) (doctoral thesis). Universidad de Granada. p. 461. ISBN978-84-338-4961-8.
  13. ^ Tschirner, Erwin (February 2005). "Das ACTFL OPI und der Europäische Referenzrahmen" (PDF). Babylonia (in German). Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 March 2006. Too quoted in Baztán 2008, p. 468
  14. ^ Buitrago (unpublished, 2006) as quoted in Baztán 2008, pp. 469–70
  15. ^ A reference of the talk can be found in the EP Bibliography of "English language Profile", under "General materials" and then under North 2006, Link to English Profile (Bibliography)
  16. ^ "The correspondences are attributed past the eye to an ACTFL administrator" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on sixteen Jan 2014.
  17. ^ https://world wide web.govtilr.org/Skills/readingassessment.pdf[ blank URL PDF ]
  18. ^ https://world wide web.govtilr.org/Skills/speakingassessment.pdf[ bare URL PDF ]
  19. ^ https://www.govtilr.org/Skills/listeningassessment.pdf[ bare URL PDF ]
  20. ^ https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=090000168045bb52
  21. ^ "French Classes in Baltimore / French University DC MD VA". french-baltimore.com.
  22. ^ "PowerPoint Presentation" (PDF) . Retrieved two May 2013.
  23. ^ Level 2+ was the highest possible classification for listening items.
  24. ^ "New Canadian Perspectives: Proposal for a Common Framework of Reference For Languages for Canada (archived)" (PDF). Canadian Heritage. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 July 2011. Retrieved 15 July 2017.
  25. ^ a b "Proposal of a CFR for Canada". Elp-implementation.ecml.at. Archived from the original on fifteen August 2011. Retrieved 14 August 2011.
  26. ^ "Postal service-Secondary Educational activity, Preparation and Labour / Éducation postsecondaire, Formation et Travail". Gnb.ca. Retrieved two May 2013. [ permanent dead link ]
  27. ^ "Qualification Standards 3 / iii". Tbs-sct.gc.ca. 15 April 2013. Retrieved 2 May 2013.
  28. ^ "Correspondence of proficiency scales". Sil.org. 21 March 1999. Retrieved xiv August 2011.
  29. ^ "ILR Scale". Utm.edu. Archived from the original on 17 Baronial 2011. Retrieved fourteen August 2011.
  30. ^ Jennifer Macdonald; Larry Vandergrift (6–eight February 2007). "The CEFR in Canada" (PowerPoint Presentation). Council of Europe. Retrieved 17 October 2011.
  31. ^ "TOEFL Equivalency table". Vancouver English Eye. Archived from the original on 1 January 2013. Retrieved xviii July 2014.
  32. ^ Kōtō kyōiku ni okeru gaikokugo kyōiku no arata na tenbō : shīīefuāru no ōyō kanōsei o megutte. [Place of publication not identified]: Tōkyōgaikokugodaigakusekaigengoshakaikyōikusentā. 2012. ISBN9784925243858. OCLC 794365620.
  33. ^ "Cyfres Cymwysterau Cymraeg i Oedolion". www.cbac.co.united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland.
  34. ^ "Czech Language Certificate Examination (CCE) for foreigners | ILPS CU". ujop.cuni.cz.
  35. ^ "Archived re-create" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 March 2018. Retrieved 24 November 2013. {{cite spider web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  36. ^ "Certificate of Dutch as a Foreign Language" (PDF). CNaVT. Archived from the original (PDF) on 26 February 2013. Retrieved 27 October 2013.
  37. ^ "Wat zijn de Staatsexamens NT2?" (in Dutch). College voor Examens. Retrieved 26 March 2013.
  38. ^ "TrackTest Language levels". TrackTest. Retrieved 12 December 2013.
  39. ^ "Wheebox TOELS". Wheebox.
  40. ^ "iTEP and CEFR". iTEP.
  41. ^ "IELTS — Common European Framework". IELTS. Retrieved 4 January 2013.
  42. ^ "IELTS and the Cambridge ESOL examinations in a European context" (PDF). British Council. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 May 2014. Retrieved 3 August 2014.
  43. ^ "IELTS band scores & CEF level scale for Clarity programs" (PDF). Clarity English. Retrieved three August 2014.
  44. ^ a b "Mapping the TOEIC Tests on the Common European Framework Reference" (PDF). ETS Website. ETS. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 October 2011. Retrieved 22 September 2011.
  45. ^ "Duolingo English language Test". englishtest.duolingo.com.
  46. ^ "TOEFL: For Academic Institutions: Compare Scores". world wide web.ets.org.
  47. ^ "Research". Retrieved 25 February 2013.
  48. ^ "Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)". Retrieved 25 Feb 2013.
  49. ^ "Data" (PDF). efset.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on half-dozen October 2015. Retrieved half dozen October 2015.
  50. ^ Amega Spider web Technology. "Metropolis & Guilds English — The Common European Framework". Cityandguildsenglish.com. Archived from the original on nine Jan 2016. Retrieved 14 August 2011.
  51. ^ "Languages Ladder". Cilt.org.united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland. Archived from the original on 28 August 2011. Retrieved 14 August 2011.
  52. ^ "International language standards". Cambridge ESOL. Archived from the original on 29 July 2015. Retrieved 22 July 2015.
  53. ^ "MICHIGAN LANGUAGE Cess". CAMLA. Archived from the original on 22 August 2019. Retrieved 9 August 2019.
  54. ^ a b c "MET Go!". CaMLA. Archived from the original on 10 Baronial 2019. Retrieved 9 August 2019.
  55. ^ a b c d "MICHIGAN Linguistic communication Assessment". CaMLA. Archived from the original on 10 August 2019. Retrieved ix August 2019.
  56. ^ "ECCE". CAMLA. Retrieved nine August 2019.
  57. ^ "ECPE". CaMLA. Archived from the original on ix August 2019. Retrieved 9 August 2019.
  58. ^ "Trinity College London - Integrated Skills in English language (ISE)".
  59. ^ "Trinity Higher London - Graded Examinations in Spoken English (GESE)".
  60. ^ Curcin, Milja; Black, Beth. "Investigating standards in GCSE French, German and Castilian through the lens of the CEFR" (PDF). gov.great britain. OfQual. Retrieved 26 June 2020.
  61. ^ "CEFR language learning levels explained and compared | Support | gostudylink". gostudylink.net . Retrieved 6 October 2020.
  62. ^ "Comparison tabular array | Research | EIKEN | Eiken Foundation of Nihon". www.eiken.or.jp.
  63. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 September 2013. Retrieved 2013-09-20 . {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as championship (link)
  64. ^ Deutsch-Französische Industrie- und Handelskammer. "Niveaubeschreibung" (PDF). ETS Global . Retrieved 12 September 2019.
  65. ^ "What is the TestDaF?" (PDF). TestDaF. Retrieved 22 July 2015.
  66. ^ "Framework of Reference for Languages" (PDF). TestDaF. Retrieved 22 July 2015.
  67. ^ "Information for the Centre for the Greek Language and the certificate of attainment in Greek". Retrieved 7 August 2012.
  68. ^ "Evaluation Scale of Communication Competence for Students of Hebrew - The Hebrew University of Jerusalem" (PDF) . Retrieved 5 January 2020.
  69. ^ "Íslenskupróf vegna ríkisborgararéttar". Retrieved 16 February 2020.
  70. ^ Kristinsson, Ari (2013). "Innflytjendur og íslenskupróf" [Immigrants and Icelandic Language Tests]. Milli Mála (in Icelandic). 5: 73–94.
  71. ^ "Nigh the JFT-Basic｜JFT-Basic Japan Foundation Test for Basic Japanese". www.jpf.become.jp . Retrieved i Nov 2019.
  72. ^ "J-cert生活・職能日本語検定【国際人財開発機構】". world wide web.j-cert.org.
  73. ^ Won, Yunhee. "Common European Framework of Reference for Language (CEFR) and Exam of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK)" (PDF). Pusan National University. Retrieved 19 November 2017.
  74. ^ "Egzaminy Certyfikatowe z Języka Polskiego jako Obcego". Archived from the original on 30 July 2015. Retrieved four August 2015.
  75. ^ "Centro de Avaliação de Português Língua Estrangeira". Archived from the original on 14 June 2012. Retrieved 4 September 2012.
  76. ^ "Certificado de Proficiência em Língua Portuguesa para Estrangeiros". Retrieved iv September 2012. [ permanent expressionless link ]
  77. ^ "TKRI Overview". Archived from the original on 21 December 2012. Retrieved 22 November 2012.
  78. ^ "Descripción – Diplomas de Español Como Lengua Extranjera". Instituto Cervantes. Retrieved 19 Baronial 2011.
  79. ^ "Türkçe Yeterlik Sınavı (TYS)". Yunus Emre Institute. Retrieved x March 2017.
  80. ^ "Luxembourgeois | Institut National des Langues".
  81. ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 26 September 2015. Retrieved 2014-02-17 . {{cite spider web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  82. ^ de Jong, John H.A.Fifty. "Unwarranted Claim about CEF Alignment of some International English Tests — Pearson" (PDF). Ealta.european union.org. Retrieved fifteen July 2017.
  83. ^ Nishimura-Sahi, Oshie (29 Nov 2020). "Policy borrowing of the Mutual European Framework of Reference for languages (CEFR) in Japan: an analysis of the interplay between global education trends and national policymaking". Asia Pacific Journal of Education: 1–14. doi:10.1080/02188791.2020.1844145. ISSN 0218-8791. S2CID 229434677.
  84. ^ Afip, Liyana Ahmad; Hamid, Grand. Obaidul; Renshaw, Peter (27 May 2019). "Common European framework of reference for languages (CEFR): insights into global policy borrowing in Malaysian college education". Globalisation, Societies and Education. 17 (3): 378–393. doi:ten.1080/14767724.2019.1578195. ISSN 1476-7724. S2CID 151143912.
  85. ^ Nguyen, Van Huy; Hamid, M. Obaidul (9 August 2021). "The CEFR equally a national language policy in Vietnam: insights from a sociogenetic assay". Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 42 (vii): 650–662. doi:x.1080/01434632.2020.1715416. ISSN 0143-4632. S2CID 213016876.
  86. ^ a b c d Nishiyama, Noriyuki (2009). "L'bear on du Cadre europeen commun de reference pour les langues dans l'Asie du Nord-Est : pour une meilleure contextualisation du CECR". Revue japonaise de didactique du français. 4 (1): 54–70. doi:10.24495/rjdf.4.1_54.
  87. ^ "Keio Inquiry Center for Foreign Language Didactics". www.flang.keio.ac.jp (in Japanese). Retrieved eleven September 2021.
  88. ^ 欧洲语言共同参考框架 (Ouzhou yu yan gong tong tin can kao kuang jia : xue eleven, jiao xue, ping gu). Jun Liu, Rong Fu, Tingda Li, 刘骏., 傅荣., 李婷妲. (Di 1 ban ed.). Beijing Shi: Wai yu jiao xue yu yan jiu chu ban she. 2008. ISBN978-7-5600-8032-1. OCLC 459867370. {{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  89. ^ Bellassen, Joël (2011). Is Chinese Europcompatible? Is the Mutual European Framework Common?: The Common European Framework of References for Languages Facing Distant Linguistic communication (PDF). Tokyo: New Prospect for Foreign Language Teaching in Higher Education —Exploring the Possibilities of Application of CECR—, Tokyo, World Linguistic communication and Lodge Education Center (WoLSEC). pp. 23–31. ISBN978-4-925243-85-eight.
  90. ^ Bellassen, Joel; Zhang, Li (2008). « Ouzhou yuyan gongtong cankao kuangjia xin linian dui hanyu jiaoxue de qishi yu tuidong » <欧洲语言共同参考框架>新理念对汉语教学的启示与推动(Les incidences de la nouvelle approche du CECRL sur la didactique du chinois). Chinese Teaching in the World 世界汉语教学. Vol. three. Beijing.
  91. ^ Tsai, Ya-hsun (2009). "以CEFR為華語能力指標之網路華語分級評量題庫建置 ». 新加坡: « Teaching and Learning of Chinese every bit a Second Linguistic communication », Singapore Centre for Chinese Language".
  92. ^ Raphael Poss (two July 2014). "A CEFR-like arroyo to mensurate programming proficiency". Retrieved eighteen July 2014.

Works cited [edit]

  • Jean-Claude, Bertin (2010). Second Language Distance Learning and Teaching: Theoretical Perspectives and Didactic Ergonomics: Theoretical Perspectives and Didactic Ergonomics. IGI Global. ISBN978-1-61520-708-4.

External links [edit]

Media related to Common European Framework of Reference for Languages at Wikimedia Commons

brooksdaithis1997.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_for_Languages

Post a Comment for "Common European Framework Reading Compare to Grade Level"