|
 |
Ideas for a purely ling. CEFR-like scale? | ||
Tags: Placement Test | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : General discussion |  | |
| mrwarper Diglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member Spain forum_posts.asp?TID=Registered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5227 days ago 1493 posts - 2500 votes  Speaks: Spanish*, EnglishC2 Studies: German, Russian, Japanese | Message 1 of 35 23 June 2013 at 7:53pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
If you have been following this other thread (Average Joe/Jose takes a level test) about C2 tests and natives, you know many of us think one 'flaw' of the CEFR scale is that the higher the level, the more stuff is taken into account that's more cognitive-based than purely dependant on knowledge of the TL. This is perfectly fine for the goals covered by the CEFR, mind you, but some of us are not all too happy about it yet. In the words of another HTLALer,
I'd be very interested in devising an alternative language level system that would do exactly that: measure language ability beyond the B1 level without involving the candidate education as well, or doing so as little as possible. I know many of you will think this is not necessary. While that might even be true, I think for most others of us here the whole idea is interesting at the very least, so please try and spare us the comments on how we are wasting time on this ;) My own ideas would start with seeing how well candidates do whatever we decide to test in their native language first (so there's a linguistic handicap of 0), then using that as a measure to see how well the same task is tested in the presence of linguistic hurdles. This assumes everyone is always most competent using their NL than any other, which would be true except for possibly narrow, very especially TL-cultured areas. I understand some will see this working hypothesis as too far-fetched, so alternatives to that are also welcome... Edited by mrwarper on 23 June 2013 at 7:54pm 9 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| montmorency Diglot Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 4829 days ago 2371 posts - 3676 votes Speaks: English*, German Studies: Danish, Welsh | Message 2 of 35 23 June 2013 at 11:19pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
Would it be fair to say that what you are calling for is a "non-academic" scale of
linguistic achievement? Would it also be fair to say that this would be mostly in the speaking and listening skills, and that reading and writing beyond basic literacy would not be important? Or is that over-simplifying? 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Bao Diglot Senior Member Germany tinyurl.com/pe4kqe5 Joined 5767 days ago 2256 posts - 4046 votes Speaks: German*, English Studies: French, Spanish, Japanese, Mandarin | Message 3 of 35 24 June 2013 at 1:58am | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
When reading your first post about in that thread, mrwarper, I noticed that you seemed
to describe cloze deletion problems as mainly dependent on cognitive skills, whereas I for one can only solve such questions relying on my procedural knowledge of the language. At a certain level, you might not be able to tell whether a non-native speaker understands spoken language with ease, or whether they have to use their conscious knowledge of vocabulary and context in order to understand those words they can't distinguish. And I wonder, does it matter, as long as one manages to compensate for weaknesses? But if you wanted to test for pure linguistic skill I would assume the only way of doing so is a set-up like it's used for speech disorder diagnostics, and I guess you'd need to test both languages for every sub-skill. Edited by Bao on 24 June 2013 at 1:58am 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| mrwarper Diglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member Spain forum_posts.asp?TID=Registered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5227 days ago 1493 posts - 2500 votes Speaks: Spanish*, EnglishC2 Studies: German, Russian, Japanese | Message 4 of 35 24 June 2013 at 3:26am | IP Logged | |||||||||||
I would say "not exclusively academic". (Edit: reworded to not be offensive -- so much easier after some sleep :) People who can't, not simply choose, go far academically learn their language perfectly within their limits and still do better, language-wise, than many foreign learners. This makes me think that it should be possible to devise a system in which such 'academic abilities' and achievements (which we consider irrelevant as per my first post) would not affect measurements of candidates' language skills. Kind of like being smart might help you to beat rivals in a martial arts tournament but holding a degree in Chemistry (because you are so smart) won't.
Sorry, I'll have to think about the deeper implications of that... ;(
Perhaps there's more than one kind of cloze deletion problems, perhaps there's more than one way to solve them even if they're all essentially alike. Please elaborate on that -- I want to leave out stuff following some logic, not any sense of aesthetics of mine :)
If you compensate your weaknesses to do something as well as someone who doesn't need to compensate anything, shouldn't you both get equal scores? And, how being a native changes how people compensate for unknown or unheard words? Edited by mrwarper on 24 June 2013 at 1:34pm 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Cavesa Triglot Senior Member Czech Republic Joined 5010 days ago 3277 posts - 6779 votes Speaks: Czech*, FrenchC2, EnglishC1 Studies: Spanish, German, Italian | Message 5 of 35 24 June 2013 at 9:55pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
I think the self assessment "can do" list is a good basis. designing an exam is much harder but I think just adding a number of alternative "can do" statements could make the original scale much more precise and less academic. You would still need to get 80% of those statements to believe you are on the level but you would have a wider selection including non academical skills.
Example of things which I miss at various levels: -can use familiar expressions and limited vocabulary to get across message in professional settings (shop assistants, waiters etc. who use these basics at work but can't tell anything about themselves) -can understand a joke -can understand a situational joke -can tell a joke (and a situational joke) -can understand people with speech impediments, including drunk people -can not only debate but argue with people, even under a lot of emotions -can go on a date with native speaker of the language -can understand a small child 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Cavesa Triglot Senior Member Czech Republic Joined 5010 days ago 3277 posts - 6779 votes Speaks: Czech*, FrenchC2, EnglishC1 Studies: Spanish, German, Italian | Message 6 of 35 24 June 2013 at 10:00pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
And what I miss, as quite noone dares to guess, is the number of vocabulary items and a list of grammar things you need for each level. The textbooks can be a kind of a lead but an imperfect one. And I have even seen exams that claim C2=5000 actively known words.
1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| I'm With Stupid Senior Member Vietnam Joined 4174 days ago 165 posts - 349 votes Speaks: English* Studies: German, Vietnamese | Message 7 of 35 24 June 2013 at 10:14pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
I get what you're saying, but outside of the context of business or academics, why is there any need to put a label on your language ability? Surely you know in a far more precise way than any number or letter could tell you exactly what your strengths and weaknesses are and exactly what problems you have with the language?
5 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||
| Juаn Senior Member Colombia Joined 5346 days ago 727 posts - 1830 votes Speaks: Spanish* | Message 8 of 35 24 June 2013 at 11:23pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||
|
I don't believe what you're asking has much relevance or sense. How do we understand language outside the contents it conveys? Advanced vocabulary and syntax are a response to and embodiment of higher expression needs; they don't reside outside or lead an objective existence besides the actual use they are put to.
It would be like pretending to test whether a subject possesses the communicative abilities necessary for shopping, but expressly excluding the concepts of buying and selling along with the names and characteristics of any products they might purchase. How would anyone master the language employed in philosophy, literature or physics if they have not engaged in those disciplines, or indeed develop any form of language ability beyond the colloquial level without reading or taking part in cultural or intellectual activities? Truth is, C1-C2 levels of language achievement represent indeed degrees of education and cultivation - these and the language they employ being inseparable, one giving voice and tangible form to the other. Those individuals and communities such as those described in the original quote which do not rise above everyday communication, while perfectly fluent in their own language, lack proficiency in it. That is the key distinction, regarding which being a native speaker or not has no relevance. How can "language ability" devoid of meaningful expression be measured? Perhaps a pure grammar examination, like declension, conjugation or syntax exercises. I for one however would not rank success in these task very highly as an indication of language achievement. Edited by Juаn on 24 June 2013 at 11:26pm 4 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
