The English Grammar Profile of learner competence

This doctoral thesis aims to analyse both the grammar competence and the metadiscurse competence in the written production in English made by Spanish learners with B2 and C1 English levels of language of the Common European Framework for Languages (2001). Thus, the main objective is to identify and compare the students' grammar competence and metadiscourse grammar in levels B2 and C1 of English in order to be able to analyse and differentiate the knowledge features existing in every language level. The motivation behind this work was the lack of research which studies these competences simultaneously. In order to meet this objective, a corpus of 120 essays was manually compiled, all of them having a total of 26,998 words written by 120 Spanish learners, aged between 18 and 46, who are studying English as a foreign language in Spain. The methodology used to achieve the stated objective was a combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis of the corpus. Each piece of writing was examined so as to be able to manually label the students' grammar and metadiscourse competences. Within the analysis of grammar competence, a distinction between two typologies was made, the analysis of the morphological elements and that of the syntactical elements, following the differentiation between the morphological and the syntactical level included in the Common European Framework of References for Languages (CEFRL, 2001). With respect to the metadiscourse level, a distinction was made between the analysis of the textual metadiscourse strategies and the analysis of the interpersonal metadiscourse strategies, taking as a reference Hyland's (2005) classification. Both the morphosyntax and the metadiscourse elements were labelled manually, and a computer recount was subsequently made. The overall results from the analysis of the essays made by Spanish students having B2 and C1 CFRL levels showed that the students of both levels have, in grammar competence, a higher knowledge of the morphological elements and processes than that of syntax. As for the metadiscourse level, the study also found that the students have a higher competence in interpersonal rather than in textual skills. The interpretation of the results allowed us to identify the characteristic features in grammar and metadiscourse competences. Likewise, the elements that students master at B2 and C1 levels were identified, as well as the students' specific needs in every language level.; Esta tesis doctoral se centra en analizar la competencia gramatical y la competencia metadiscursiva en la produccion escrita en ingles realizada por aprendientes espanoles con niveles de conocimiento de lengua inglesa B2 y C1 del Marco Comun Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas (2001). Asi pues, el objetivo principal es identificar y comparar la competencia gramatical y del metadiscurso de estudiantes con niveles de conocimiento del ingles B2 y C1 con el fin de analizar y diferenciar los rasgos de conocimiento de cada uno de los niveles linguisticos. La razon por la que se llevo a…

The study reported here investigates the validity of judgments made when aligning tests to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR). Listening tests operationalizing pre-defined difficulty-determining characteristics were to be aligned to CEFR levels. We employed a modified version of the item-descriptor-matching-method. Ten judges stated the CEFR descriptors they thought each item operationalizes and assigned a global CEFR level per item. We compared agreement on CEFR level judgments and CEFR descriptors quoted. Analyzing the relationship between CEFR level judgments and item ratings of difficulty-determining characteristics shed light on further criteria the judges employed. Follow-up interviews helped to triangulate the findings by examining judges’ perceptions of the alignment procedure.We found that judges relied on different criteria and CEFR descriptors to a varying degree, interpreting CEFR levels differently. There seemed little comparability in what aspects judges used to form their global CEFR judgments. Therefore, if an alignment does not take into account the meaning of the CEFR levels as expressed by existing CEFR descriptors, this raises issues with alignment validity, and hence the validity of test-score interpretation and usage. Given the impact of using CEFR aligned tests for high-stakes purposes, this article aims to shed more light on what assigning a CEFR level to a test actually means.

The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) is intended as a reference document for language education including assessment. This article describes a project that investigated whether the CEFR can help test developers construct reading and listening tests based on CEFR levels. If the CEFR scales together with the detailed description of language use contained in the CEFR are not sufficient to guide test development at these various levels, then what is needed to develop such an instrument? The project methodology involved gathering expert judgments on the usability of the CEFR for test construction, identifying what might be missing from the CEFR, developing a frame for analysis of tests and specifications, and examining a range of existing test specifications and guidelines to item writers and sample test tasks for different languages at the 6 levels of the CEFR. Outcomes included a critical review of the CEFR, a set of compilations of CEFR scales and of test specifications at the different CEFR levels, and a series of frameworks or classification systems, which led to a Web-mounted instrument known as the Dutch CEFR Grid. Interanalyst agreement in using the Grid for analyzing test tasks was quite promising, but the Grids need to be improved by training and discussion before decisions on test task levels are made. The article concludes, however, that identifying separate CEFR levels is at least as much an empirical matter as it is a question of test content, either determined by test specifications or identified by any content classification system or grid.

This paper is an overview of Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK). Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) is a test to measure and evaluate the Korean language proficiency targeting for overseas Koreans and foreigners who do not speak Korean as their first language. The TOPIK is utilized for studying in Korean universities or taking advantages of employment. Systems of the TOPIK are largely divided into TOPIK I and TOPIK II: TOPIK I is divided into the Beginner 1 and 2; TOPIK II is divided into Intermediate 1, 2, Advanced 1, and 2, all of which are equal to the measure proposed in the European common reference standard. Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) is equipped with a six-step framework for language proficiency and communicative activities. This system describes knowledge, skills, cultural competence, and regulations of each step-by-step learning skill level for the purpose of communication in the private, public, and occupational areas. This paper first presents the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) that is familiar to Europeans, and compares it with the TOPIK system. First, it compares the TOPIK with the Common European Framework of Reference on the overall system, the assessment method, question types and etc. Also, it briefly examines foreign language education in Korea. Foreign language education in Korea was in abstract level as compared to the Common European Framework of Reference or topic. As in Europe, Korea also divides the language acquisition into 6 levels. It prepares the evaluation criteria for each level. Criteria and test methods can be understood by comparing the German language test and TOPIK to be carried out in accordance with the Common European Framework of Reference. Test methods and criteria of the German test and TOPIK are similar, but information and instruction for testing showed at the Goethe-Institute is far more detailed than TOPIK in Korea. The problem lies in the absence of speaking test in TOPIK. In order to understand the language proficiency, speaking, listening, reading and writing in all parts should be evaluated; however, there is no speaking test in TOPIK, and it is unfortunate that there is no writing test in the beginner-level test. This is what should be improved in the future.

This study aims to analyze the trend of CEFR(Common European Framework of Reference) related research in South Korea using the method of a systematic review and to discuss the research fields required in relation to CEFR. The Council of Europe released the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) in 2001. It acts as a standard for curriculum, teaching, learning, and evaluation. With this, thirty kinds of literature from the years 2000 to 2020 that satisfied the selection criteria were chosen from a search of CEFR-related research on English education. After the 2015 revised national curriculum was implemented, studies related to CEFR increased by 70% from 2018 in terms of publication year, and 60% of those studies used quantitative methodologies. After organizing the subjects of the studies by the Korean academic levels and CEFR levels, the data showed a focus on research for elementary and university while a wide range of CEFR levels from Basic User to Proficient User was represented. Since CEFR builds vocabulary, grammar, and language competence based on corpus data, 80% of the studies were performed in relation to the curriculum and evaluation using the corpus. However, in order to successfully apply CEFR to Korean English education, research on more detailed level settings and the linkage between each level needs to be actively conducted. More studies are necessary to adapt CEFR to the EFL context in Korea since CEFR describes communication skills that L2 learners should have, including pluricultural competence. This means a wide range of studies on CEFR are needed to expand the quality and quantity of English education in Korea.

The CEFR is currently being used globally as a guiding document for specifying the standards of language learning, teaching, and assessment. The university wherein this study takes place, assumes that its internally produced English language tests are CEFR-related because they are based on textbooks which claim affinity with the CEFR. This study investigates the validity of this assumption. The literature review suggests a wealth of studies which link a specific test or exam to the CEFR based on the technical procedures laid out in the Manual for Relating Language Examinations to the CEFR (the Manual). This study has a different approach as it investigates whether the internally produced English language tests at a Saudi Arabian university are linked/related to the CEFR from the perspectives of the academic staff who are responsible for producing the English language tests at the university wherein this study is conducted. As such, this study is situated within an interpretative case study paradigm and uses a mixed method methodology for data collection and analysis. The study showed that all the research participants share the view that the English language exams which they develop are CEFR linked/related because they are based on the learning outcomes of textbooks which, according to the publisher, are CEFR linked. In addition, the contextual issues related to the implementation of the Manual and the CEFR are to be considered. The study presents implications and recommendations for the institution and for ELT publishers who claim that their ELT materials are CEFR linked.

In this paper we take a critical look at the approach to competence in the Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe, 2001a) and highlight inconsistencies in defining, structuring and positioning the notion in the model for foreign language learning and teaching presented in the document, which translates into lack of consistency in the interpretation of competence in research based on the Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe 2001a).

Errors should be viewed as a key feature of language learning and language use. In this paper, we focus on the identification and classification of errors that are related to students’ grammar acquisition and pragmatic competence. Our objectives are, first, to propose the tagging of grammatical errors and pragmatic errors according to the competences of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and, second, to determine where there is a correspondence between the different types of error. In order to meet these objectives, we designed a grid to tag the pragmatic errors produced by students with a B1 level of proficiency. It was based on the errors found in a corpus of written texts produced by undergraduate students at the Universitat Politècnica de València. Students wrote specific assignments based on the proposals specified in the CEFR for the development of pragmatic and grammatical competences. The texts were corrected and tagged manually by raters, who classified the errors using the grids and considered whether the errors were grammatical or pragmatic. Finally, the conclusions of our study were that some grammatical and pragmatic errors coincided and that this correspondence should be taken into account by language teachers.

Since it was first published by the Council of Europe in 2001, the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) has become one of the most widely referenced documents in language education, particularly in English language teaching and assessment (Savski, in press). The recently released CEFR Companion Volume (2020), with its new descriptions of plurilingual and pluricultural competence and mediation, has done much to extend the potential of the framework, as it provides a more concrete foundation for using CEFR to support heteroglossic pedagogies. In this way, CEFR has acquired a greater level of potential relevance to innovative pedagogies in English language education, such as Global Englishes Language Teaching (GELT), which seeks to equip learners with communicative skills and dispositions needed for success in a world where the target interlocutors are linguistically and culturally diverse (Rose & Galloway, 2019). In this paper, we examine the prospects for using CEFR to support heteroglossic pedagogies like GELT, highlighting points of convergence between descriptions of competence in CEFR and current scholarship in Global Englishes, as well as points of divergence between the two. We underline the need to embed CEFR in decentralizing educational reforms, in which the framework is used to facilitate teacher agency, rather than to impose objectives and methods upon them.

In pedagogical debates about there ELT students are Global Englishes (GE) and English as a lingua franca (ELF), is widespread agreement concerning an urgent need for liberating teachers and students from the normative constraints of ELT’s orientation towards standard English by raising their awareness of the characteristics and complexities of GE/ELF communication. remedial education based on generally perceived as weak GE/ELF communicators requiring the analysis of recorded GE/ELF exchanges. Contrary to this deficit view, this article calls for acknowledging ELT students as ‘speaker-learners’, who are endowed with a natural capability for communication including strategic creativity, contextual inferencing, empathetic cooperativity, and communication monitoring. Through a as principal agents of ‘MY English’ development, guided by their personal communicative and communal success and their aspiration for speaker satisfaction. A social constructivist lens, they appear requirements of normalizing account of GE/ELF communication and an emancipatory MY English perspective on ELT provide the theoretical-conceptual underpinnings of an immersive pedagogical GE/ELF approach, preferably implemented through virtual exchange in a blended learning environment. Pedagogical mentoring is essential for helping students assume MY English responsibility, make best use of their ordinary communicative capability, and exploit the translanguaging range of their resources when faced with unfamiliar challenges in GE/ELF encounters.

The functional and communicative perspective on language advocated in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), hides the fact that, while the CEFR programmatically emphasises the role of pragmatic competence in language learning, it provides little guidance in how to transform the domain of language learning, teaching and testing, accordingly. In the present paper, we argue for an extended and more detailed treatment of pragmatic competence in the context of the CEFR, that we think is necessary to enable practitioners to implement this conception of communicative competence in their everyday work. Whereas a gap between the CEFR’s programmatic vision and practical requirements has been noted and addressed, e.g. by the creation of reference level descriptions (RLDs) for individual languages, the pragmatic component has thus far not been thoroughly covered by the respective initiatives, such as the English Profile. Based on a review of definitions of pragmatic competence in the linguistic literature, we claim that a customised methodology will be necessary to fully integrate pragmatic competence into CEFR-based descriptions of language competence, especially if these descriptions are to be operationalised in language testing and certification. We then present our own approach to the issue of assessing pragmatic competence, which is part of an ongoing research project called Pragmatic Profiling (PRA.PRO). One of the main goals of this project is to establish pragmatic profiles of different varieties of English based on native speaker communicative behaviour, elicited via a variety of tasks in a standardized questionnaire format (the Questionnaire on English Usage), and other methods. The pragmatic norms derived from this empirical data can be directly compared with learner performance, which will ultimately allow us to assess divergence from native speaker norms and, thereby, evaluate levels of developing pragmatic competence in learners. Our primary concern is to point out that more empirical research is needed to link the levels of theoretical description and concrete communicative performance, and that the methodology employed in PRA.PRO is a promising route to achieving this goal

Learning is a combination formed from several elements, including materials, which can influence the achievement of learning objectives. Material elements include: textbooks, so that research on the design of Arabic reading and writing materials for beginners based on the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) is worth doing. This study aims to determine: (1). Design of Arabic reading and writing materials for beginners based on CEFR at MTS Khoiru Ummah, Central Maluku Regency. (2). Supporting and inhibiting factors in designing Arabic reading and writing materials for beginners based on CEFR at MTS Khoiru Ummah, Central Maluku Regency. This research is a development research. Research and development include one of the methods to obtain certain new results, models, methods, strategies, ways, designs, or steps with descriptions and development of results and trials to obtain maximum results. Learning reading and writing skills continues to experience curriculum development from time to time. CEFR theory has contributed to the development of the curriculum design for learning these two Arabic language skills. This CEFR-based curriculum is designed by determining the limits of learning objectives at levels A1 and A2. CEFR has 6 levels, the lowest A1 and the highest C2 in the order of A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, and C2. Levels A1 and A2 are designed for beginners in every foreign language learning based on this theory. At the beginner level, students are able to distinguish the sounds of hijaiyah letters, read and write words that are heard and seen, write and read simple phrases and sentences found around them well. Teaching materials are presented in the form of a communicative approach to make students more active and participate in the learning process by using modern learning media either in the form of materials or learning applications that support the achievement of goals. While the evaluation is presented by paying attention to the differences in students' intellectual abilities. Namely starting from easy questions then increasing in difficulty according to level. So that the curriculum for reading and writing language is presented in gradual teaching materials with familiar themes and following the development of the era and the environment of the students. Supporting and inhibiting factors in designing Arabic reading and writing materials based on CEFR at MTs Khoiru Ummah, Central Maluku Regency. a. Supporting Factors, 1) There is a curriculum used by MTs based on the 2013 curriculum for junior high school/MTs level and will implement the Merdeka curriculum at MTs. 2) Teaching staff in accordance with their fields, 3) Textbooks used. The school facilities and environment are very supportive in learning Arabic for beginners because students are required to be in the dormitory. b. Inhibiting Factors, 1) The level of student ability was not identified at the time of input or at the time of registration and entrance exams for MTs..2) The teaching materials in the textbooks used do not focus on reading and writing lessons, making it difficult for students to master Arabic reading and writing skills..

We report on a standard-setting project in which the Item-Descriptor-Matching Method (IDM) and a complementary benchmarking approach were employed to align a suite of English language proficiency exams to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR), with a particular focus on the integrated and independent writing exams. Judges’ ratings on eight writing tasks and 48 test taker scripts were collected online via SmartSurvey. The judges gave CEFR-level jkudgements for tasks and scripts, they stated which CEFR descriptors they matched against the task demands and scripts, and they evaluated the combined approach and outcomes. Thus, it was possible to monitor how judges applied and interpreted the CEFR descriptors, a prerequisite for establishing alignment validity. Analyses of judgement consistency revealed a high level of consistency on the task judgements and overall performance ratings, yet they also revealed some variations in the selected CEFR descriptors underpinning the judgements. Making these variations transparent facilitated a targeted discussion with an explicit focus on the CEFR, i.e. the framework to which the tests were to be aligned. Overall, the judges reported confidence in using the combined approaches, in their judgements and in the recommended CEFR cut-scores, thus corroborating procedural validity.

Language wants of English majors in a non-native context

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR) (Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) has been widely accepted as a reference for aligning curricula, learning outcomes, teaching materials and assessments for European and, more recently, non-European languages. However, it seems that the CEFR has been more utilised on the macro level, i.e. for curriculum and proficiency test development and course book design rather than on the micro level, i.e. to support teaching and learning. The field of teaching Arabic as a foreign language is lagging behind on both levels. This paper reports on the initial stage of a wide-ranging project which aims at full adoption of the CEFR (on both the macro and micro levels) in a non-specialist Arabic language course. The paper, specifically, details the context and methodology of designing a CEFR-aligned Arabic curriculum framework based on the compilation of curriculum salient features from the CEFR document.