Arabic Listening Comprehension Test Questions for Beginner Level Based on Competency Standards (ACTFL)

Tests or questions that use ACTFL standards at level Novice is one way to find out Arabic language learning standards and students' ability standards, especially writing skills tests. ACTFL standardization at the Novice level consists of 3 levels, namely Novice High (high beginner level), Novice Mid (intermediate beginner level), and Novice Low (low beginner level). The research uses a qualitative method through a literature study by studying the Skills Guide book American Council On The Teaching Of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) and other literature such as articles and books. Based on the results of the analysis carried out in this research, there are 20 tests or questions according to ACTFL standardization at the level Novice that is 20% of the questions of difficulty level or Novice High (4 questions), 50% of the questions are medium level or Novice Mid (10 questions), and 30% easy level questions or Novice Low (6 questions). Keywords: Test, Writing Skills, Beginner (Novice), ACTFL.

Foreign Language Testing Constructs, Frameworks, and Assessments

This study aims to design an Arabic vocabulary test based on the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) standards for the novice level. Utilizing the framework established by ACTFL, the test is designed to measure the mastery of basic vocabulary relevant to daily communicative needs at the novice level. The research methodology includes analyzing the needs of novice learners, selecting appropriate words, and crafting questions that cover various aspects of vocabulary comprehension and usage in real-life contexts. The results of the study indicate that the designed test effectively assesses the vocabulary skills of novice learners, with adequate validity and reliability. This test is expected to serve as a useful evaluation tool for Arabic language instructors in assessing learners' progress according to ACTFL standards.

In 1981, the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) published its Provisional Proficiency Guidelines (generic and language specific descriptions) for speaking, listening, reading, and writing. In 1986, ACTFL published its updated and sometimes expanded Proficiency Guidelines (generic descriptions only). The changes in the descriptions were by and large improvements based on the experience of trying to implement the Provisional Guidelines and on the critical response of foreign language researchers. While much attention has been focused on the speaking guidelines and the Oral Proficiency Interview, only recently has attention turned to the reading guidelines which form the focus of this article. In particular, the specific references to the implicit and explicit theoretical underpinnings in the 1986 ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines for reading will be examined. Although they have been updated, certain problems remain in the 1986 Guidelines with respect to a definition of reading and to the assessment of reading proficiency. Herein, the Guidelines will be examined along four lines. First, given the role assigned to background knowledge, reading is defined as essentially a bottom up process where top down features compensate for underdeveloped linguistic competence rather than as an interactive process whereby meaning is found not only in the text but also created by the readers. Second, by assessing levels of reading proficiency via a hierarchy of skills, comprehension is implicitly defined as a quantifiable product rather than as a process. Third, by defining levels of reading proficiency according to text type without any reference to the readers themselves, the Guidelines account for only a partial model of reading. Fourth, the theoretical model of reading on which the Guidelines are based is a hierarchical one, not an interactive model, despite claims to the contrary. Finally, the role of reading and some reading exercises in one university-level Spanish language curriculum are discussed.1 An Historical Perspective

Abstract: This paper reviews the process a university foreign language department went through in developing a procedure to assess its curriculum using the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines and, to a lesser extent, the National Standards, as guiding principles (National Standards, 1996). This procedure included a noncredit workshop that met only once to inform students about the process, an oral proficiency test, and a portfolio of students' written work. Rubrics for evaluation are described. Tables show preliminary results for the first year's assessment. It was found that the average oral proficiency rating for graduating seniors was Advanced‐Low and that 74% rated Intermediate‐High or better. Similarly, the average written proficiency rating was Advanced‐Low. Students also presented material that documented their abilities to analyze literary texts, write in a variety of styles, and demonstrate an awareness of target language culture.

The article discusses the preliminary findings of a joint National Heritage Language Resource Center (NHLRC)/American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) project conducted in 2010-11, Exploring Linguistic Profiles of Heritage Speakers of Spanish and Russian, that used the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2012 –Speaking (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, 2012b) to assess and analyze the oral proficiency of heritage speakers. The discussion of these findings follows a general discussion of what a rating based on an official ACTFL Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) actually does and does not tell us about speakers, including heritage or native speakers, who fall into various ACTFL rating ranges. The joint NHLRC/ACTFL research project analyzed which features typically characteristic of heritage speakers of Spanish and Russian prevent them from receiving higher ratings on an official ACTFL OPI, and these findings are the focus of this article. Finally, some general recommendations related to instructional implications of these findings are discussed.

to describe the target language performance abilities of foreign language learners.' The proficiency movement is spearheaded by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) which over the last several years has promoted the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines, proficiency-based curricula, syllabi, and, in general, are behind proficiency-based teaching. In the proficiency context, foreign language professionals are probably most familiar with the Oral Proficiency Interview, especially with the large scale training undertaken and the widespread implementation of oral proficiency requirements. Now gaining increasing attention is reading proficiency, which is the concern of the present paper. The ACTFL definition of reading proficiency is given in terms of a trisection between content, function, and accuracy which translate more specifically to reading as: text type, reading skill, and task-based performance (Galloway). The proficiency construct, as shown in Figure I, is characterized by two parallel hierarchies, one of text types and the other of reading skills, which are cross-sectioned to define developmental levels. In other words, a specific developmental level is associated with a particular text type and particular reading skills. By the definition of hierarchy, high level skills and text types subsume low ones so that readers demonstrating high levels of reading proficiency should be able to interact with texts and be able to demonstrate the reading skills characteristic of low levels of reading proficiency. Conversely, readers at low levels of the proficiency scale should neither be able to demonstrate high level skills nor interact with high level texts.

Journal of the International Network for Korean Language and Culture 16-2, 171-197. This study aims to suggest a methodology for the development of an assessment framework and tool for intercultural communication. The following three studies, created by the National Council of State Supervisors for Languages (NCSSFL) and the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), were examined: (1) “ACTFL Performance Descriptors for Language Learners,” (2) “2017 NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do Statements,” and (3) “NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do Statements for Intercultural Communication.” According to the ACTFL, proficiency benchmarks and performance indicators for ACTFL proficiency level are composed of two facets: “investigate” and “interact.” Next, ”Narrative” as a methodological alternative for measuring the learner’s evaluation performance is presented by considering precedent studies. Thus, this study has developed a process-focused performance assessment that combines the narrative-based assessment for intercultural communication. (Semyung University)

The chapter presents the case of the teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) program at Sultan Qaboos University (SQU) as an exemplary program that has been successful to gain recognition from the US. The chapter begins with describing the actions taken by the program that led to the success in obtaining the recognition from the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). To give a full picture of the process, the SQU program was described, elaborating the six key assessments developed to provide evidence that its candidates were meeting the ACTFL standards. It has been stressed that the process of accreditation has led to creating a climate for accreditation with the need to focus on evidence and assessment across all areas of the college and programs. The chapter also points out to the cognitive and organizational restructuring that happened at all the levels. The chapter closes with challenges that faced the program in gaining recognition from ACTFL.

In 1981, the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) published its Provisional Proficiency Guidelines (generic and language-specific descriptions) for the four language skills (speaking, listening, reading, and writing). In 1986, ACTFL published its updated and sometimes expanded Proficiency Guidelines (general descriptions only). The changes in the descriptions were by and large improvements. This paper focuses on the reading guidelines with specific reference to their theoretical underpinnings.

This book (part 2) is for use in the second semester of a University Hindi course after completion of the introductory books, ~ Wi/fitJcn/ (Beginners Hindi) and~ 4/6'i/~Rlcn (First-year Hindi Course) part 1. Four audio cassettes accompany this text; they include most of the text, answers to the exercises, and materials from 31 ICfil ~1c:uoft (All-India Radio), mostly short excerpts of news broadcasts and commercials. Like part 1, this book is also divided into six parts; each part is introduced by a film song and a conversation taken from Conversational Hindi-Urdu by Gumperz and Rumery(~ SP:fll~l'1, f~~l, ~ .... .... 'E.~~). At the end there is the script of a cooking videotape (31TS:lf' 1SfFfT a/rtl~l/) and a summary of the verb forms. At the University of Texas this text is supplemented by the following materials: 1. 'iff ~!tJJt.t rrr[ ef77r' (New Directions, New People), by F.C. Southworth, S.K. Gambhir, and Vijay Gambhir, a set of twenty Hindi videotapes accompanied by scripts. South Asia Center, 811 Williams Hall, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6305. [Volume I (Episodes 1-10) is used with this book.] 2. Authentic Materials for Developing Reading Comprehension in Hindi and Listening Comprehension in Hindi--Novice Level, Intermediate Level (with accompanying videotape) available from the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), 6 Executive Plaza, Yonkers, N.Y. 10701-6801. [These materials are distributed in loose-leaf form so that teachers can choose those portions that they wish to use. ]

The Modern Language JournalVolume 51, Issue 2 p. 104-104 The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) Robert F. Roeming, Robert F. Roeming Managing EditorSearch for more papers by this author Robert F. Roeming, Robert F. Roeming Managing EditorSearch for more papers by this author First published: February 1967 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1967.tb06708.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume51, Issue2February 1967Pages 104-104 RelatedInformation

The Modern Language JournalVolume 51, Issue 7 p. 442-447 American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) First Annual Meeting F. André Paquette, F. André Paquette Executive SecretarySearch for more papers by this author F. André Paquette, F. André Paquette Executive SecretarySearch for more papers by this author First published: November 1967 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1967.tb06732.xAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Volume51, Issue7November 1967Pages 442-447 RelatedInformation

An Interview with Paula Garrett-Rucks, Georgia State University

nation of the Proficiency Guidelines of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) (1; 2), proficiency instruction and testing have become household words in foreign language education. The Guidelines, originally developed in 1982, were the subject of over 400 articles in professional journals by 1988 (8; 18) and represent the efforts of ACTFL, with assistance from the Educational Testing Service (ETS) and Federal Interagency Language Roundtable (FILR) (9). As a method of assessing global speaking proficiency, the oral proficiency interview (OPI) has also been widely disseminated. During the 1980s, ACTFL trained approximately 2000 oral proficiency interviewers and raters in Spanish, French, German, and Russian. This article reports on an alternative method to the face-to-face procedure employed by the OPI for eliciting speech samples that may be rated according to the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. While many professionals in the commonly taught languages were being trained in the OPI procedures, it became clear to staff at the Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) that in the less commonly taught languages problems of manpower and economics would limit the accessibility of the benefits of comprehensive oral proficiency testing offered by the OPI. Thus CAL sought to explore the use of a tapemediated procedure for assessing oral proficiency. At the same time, CAL was anxious to ensure that the ACTFLIFILR Proficiency Guidelines would be used as the scoring scale for the new procedure. In other words, the new tapemediated procedure would have to collect examinee speech samples containing the necessary breadth to be rated on the ACTFL scale. Through its research and development projects, CAL has developed what has come to be called the simulated oral proficiency interview (SOPI) to achieve these ends (13). The SOPI is distinguished from earlier tapemediated assessments of speaking ability, such as the Recorded Oral Proficiency Exam (ROPE) (10) or the Test of Spoken English (TSE) (6), by its combination of each of these three characteristics: 1) in format it is similar to the OPI, beginning with a warm-up and using a variety of speaking tasks at different levels on the ACTFL scale to probe speaking proficiency; 2) it uses both aural and visual stimuli to elicit the