- •Using the electronic version
- •Bookmarks
- •Moving around the text
- •Finding a word or phrase in the text
- •Using the hyperlinks in the text
- •Copying the text
- •Printing the text
- •CONTENTS
- •PREFATORY NOTE
- •NOTES FOR THE USER
- •SYNOPSIS
- •1 The Common European Framework in its political and educational context
- •1.2 The aims and objectives of Council of Europe language policy
- •1.4 Why is CEF needed?
- •1.5 For what uses is CEF intended?
- •1.6 What criteria must CEF meet?
- •2 Approach adopted
- •2.1.1 The general competences of an individual
- •2.1.2 Communicative language competence
- •2.1.3 Language activities
- •2.1.4 Domains
- •2.1.5 Tasks, strategies and texts
- •2.3 Language learning and teaching
- •2.4 Language assessment
- •3 Common Reference Levels
- •3.1 Criteria for descriptors for Common Reference Levels
- •3.2 The Common Reference Levels
- •3.3 Presentation of Common Reference Levels
- •3.4 Illustrative descriptors
- •Communicative activities
- •Strategies
- •3.5 Flexibility in a branching approach
- •3.6 Content coherence in Common Reference Levels
- •3.7 How to read the scales of illustrative descriptors
- •4 Language use and the language user/learner
- •4.1 The context of language use
- •4.1.1 Domains
- •4.1.2 Situations
- •4.1.3 Conditions and constraints
- •4.1.4 The user/learner’s mental context
- •4.2 Communication themes
- •4.3 Communicative tasks and purposes
- •4.3.4 Ludic uses of language
- •4.3.5 Aesthetic uses of language
- •4.4 Communicative language activities and strategies
- •4.4.1 Productive activities and strategies
- •4.4.2 Receptive activities and strategies
- •4.4.4 Mediating activities and strategies
- •4.4.5 Non-verbal communication
- •4.5 Communicative language processes
- •4.5.1 Planning
- •4.5.2 Execution
- •4.5.3 Monitoring
- •4.6 Texts
- •4.6.1 Texts and media
- •4.6.2 Media include:
- •4.6.3 Text-types include:
- •4.6.4 Texts and activities
- •5 The user/learner’s competences
- •5.1 General competences
- •5.1.1 Declarative knowledge
- •5.1.2 Skills and know-how
- •5.1.4 Ability to learn
- •5.2 Communicative language competences
- •5.2.1 Linguistic competences
- •5.2.2 Sociolinguistic competence
- •5.2.3 Pragmatic competences
- •6 Language learning and teaching
- •6.1 What is it that learners have to learn or acquire?
- •6.1.3 Plurilingual competence and pluricultural competence
- •6.1.4 Variation in objectives in relation to the Framework
- •6.2 The processes of language learning
- •6.2.1 Acquisition or learning?
- •6.2.2 How do learners learn?
- •6.3 What can each kind of Framework user do to facilitate language learning?
- •6.4 Some methodological options for modern language learning and teaching
- •6.4.1 General approaches
- •6.5 Errors and mistakes
- •7 Tasks and their role in language teaching
- •7.1 Task description
- •7.2 Task performance
- •7.2.1 Competences
- •7.2.2 Conditions and constraints
- •7.2.3 Strategies
- •7.3.1 Learner competences and learner characteristics
- •7.3.2 Task conditions and constraints
- •8.2 Options for curricular design
- •8.2.2 From the partial to the transversal
- •8.3 Towards curriculum scenarios
- •8.3.1 Curriculum and variation of objectives
- •8.3.2 Some examples of differentiated curriculum scenarios
- •8.4.1 The place of the school curriculum
- •8.4.3 A multidimensional and modular approach
- •9 Assessment
- •9.1 Introduction
- •9.2.2 The criteria for the attainment of a learning objective
- •9.3 Types of assessment
- •9.3.3 Mastery CR/continuum CR
- •9.3.5 Formative assessment/summative assessment
- •9.3.6 Direct assessment/indirect assessment
- •9.3.7 Performance assessment/knowledge assessment
- •9.3.8 Subjective assessment/objective assessment
- •9.3.9 Rating on a scale/rating on a checklist
- •9.3.10 Impression/guided judgement
- •9.3.11 Holistic/analytic
- •9.3.12 Series assessment/category assessment
- •9.4 Feasible assessment and a metasystem
- •General Bibliography
- •Descriptor formulation
- •Scale development methodologies
- •Intuitive methods:
- •Qualitative methods:
- •Quantitative methods:
- •Appendix B: The illustrative scales of descriptors
- •The Swiss research project
- •Origin and Context
- •Methodology
- •Results
- •Exploitation
- •Follow up
- •References
- •The descriptors in the Framework
- •Document B1 Illustrative scales in Chapter 4: Communicative activities
- •Document B2 Illustrative scales in Chapter 4: Communication strategies
- •Document B3 Illustrative scales in Chapter 4: Working with text
- •Document B4 Illustrative scales in Chapter 5: Communicative language competence
- •Document B5 Coherence in descriptor calibration
- •Appendix C: The DIALANG scales
- •The DIALANG project
- •The DIALANG assessment system
- •Purpose of DIALANG
- •Assessment procedure in DIALANG
- •Purpose of self-assessment in DIALANG
- •The DIALANG self-assessment scales
- •Source
- •Qualitative development
- •Translation
- •Calibration of the self-assessment statements
- •Other DIALANG scales based on the Common European Framework
- •Concise scales
- •Advisory feedback
- •References
- •Document C1 DIALANG self-assessment statements
- •Document C3 Elaborated descriptive scales used in the advisory feedback section of DIALANG
- •The ALTE Framework
- •The development process
- •Textual revision
- •Anchoring to the Council of Europe Framework
- •References
- •Document D1 ALTE skill level summaries
- •Document D2 ALTE social and tourist statements summary
- •Document D3 ALTE social and tourist statements
- •Document D4 ALTE work statements summary
- •Document D5 ALTE WORK statements
- •Document D6 ALTE study statements summary
- •Document D7 ALTE STUDY statements
- •Index
Language use and the language user/learner
Sections 4.6.1 to 4.6.3 confine themselves to text types and the media which carry them. Matters often dealt with under ‘genre’ are treated in this Framework in 5.2.3 ‘pragmatic competences’.
Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:
•whether and, if so, how, the differences in the medium and in the psycholinguistic processes involved in speaking, listening, reading and writing in productive, receptive and interactive activities are taken into account a) in the selection, adaptation or composition of the spoken and written texts presented to learners, b) in the way that the learners are expected to handle the texts, and c) in the evaluation of the texts which learners produce;
•whether and, if so, how learners and teachers are made critically aware of the textual characteristics of a) classroom discourse b) testing and examination rubrics and answers, and c) instructional and reference materials;
•whether and, if so, how learners are brought to make the texts they produce more appropriate to: a) their communicative purposes, b) the contexts of use (domains, situations, recipients, constraints), c) the media employed.
4.6.4Texts and activities
The output of the process of language production is a text, which once it is uttered or written becomes an artefact carried by a particular medium and independent of its producer. The text then functions as the input to the process of language reception. Written artefacts are concrete objects, whether carved in stone, handwritten, typed, printed or electronically generated. They allow communication to take place despite the complete separation of producer and receiver in space and/or time – a property on which human society largely depends. In face-to-face oral interaction the medium is acoustic, sound waves which are normally ephemeral and irrecoverable. Indeed, few speakers are able to reproduce in exact detail a text they have just uttered in the course of conversation. Once it has served its communicative purposes it is discarded from memory – if indeed it has ever lodged there as a complete entity. However, as a result of modern technology, sound waves can be recorded and broadcast or stored in another medium and later reconverted into speech-waves. In this way, the temporo-spatial separation of producer and receiver is made possible. Furthermore, recordings of spontaneous discourse and conversation can be transcribed and analysed at leisure as texts. There is necessarily a close correlation between the categories proposed for the description of language activities and the texts resulting from those activities. Indeed the same word may be used for both. ‘Translation’ may denote either the act of translating or the text produced. Similarly, ‘conversation’, ‘debate’ or ‘interview’ may denote the communicative interaction of the participants, but equally the sequence of their exchanged utterances, which constitutes a text of a particular type belonging to a corresponding genre.
All the activities of production, reception, interaction and mediation take place in time. The real-time nature of speech is apparent, both in the activities of speaking and
97
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment
listening and in the medium itself. ‘Before’ and ‘after’ in a spoken text are to be taken quite literally. In a written text, which is usually (excluding ‘scrolled’ texts) a static spatial artefact, this is not necessarily so. In production, a written text can be edited, passages inserted or deleted. We cannot tell in what order the elements have been produced, though they are presented in a linear order as a string of symbols. Receptively, the reader’s eye is free to move over the text in any way, possibly following the linear sequence in strict order, as a child learning to read will generally do. Skilled, mature readers are much more likely to scan a text for highly information-bearing elements in order to establish an overall structure of meaning and then return to read more closely
– and if need be to re-read a number of times – such words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs as are of particular relevance to their needs and purposes. An author or editor may well use paratextual features (see section 4.4.5.3) to steer this process and, indeed, plan the text in accordance with the way in which it is expected to be read by the audience for which it is intended. Similarly, a spoken text may be carefully planned in advance so as to appear to be spontaneous, yet to ensure that an essential message is effectively conveyed under the different conditions that constrain the reception of speech. Process and product are indissolubly linked.
The text is central to any act of linguistic communication, the external, objective link between producer and receiver, whether they are communicating face to face or at a distance. The diagrams below show in a schematic form the relation between the user/learner, on whom the Framework is focused, the interlocutor(s), activities and texts.
1. Production. The user/learner produces a spoken or written text, received, often at a distance, by one or more listeners or readers, who are not called upon to reply.
1.1.Speaking
(listener)
USER → sound waves → Listener
(listener)
1.2. Writing
(reader)
USER → written text → Reader
(reader)
2.Reception. The user/learner receives a text from one or more speakers or writers, again often at a distance, and is not called upon to reply.
2.1.Listening
(speaker)
Speaker → sound waves → USER
(speaker)
2.2.Reading
(writer)
Writer → written text → USER
(writer)
98
Language use and the language user/learner
3. Interaction. The user/learner enters into a face-to-face dialogue with an interlocutor. The text of the dialogue consists of utterances respectively produced and received by each party in alternation.
USER |
↔ |
discourse |
↔ |
Interlocutor |
USER |
→ |
Text 1. |
→ |
interlocutor |
USER |
← |
Text 2. |
← |
interlocutor |
USER |
→ |
Text 3. |
→ |
interlocutor |
USER |
← |
Text 4. |
← |
interlocutor |
etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Mediation covers two activities.
4.1. Translation. The user/learner receives a text from a speaker or writer, who is not present, in one language or code (Lx) and produces a parallel text in a different language or code (Ly) to be received by another person as listener or reader at a distance.
Writer (Lx) → text (in Lx) → USER → text (in Ly) → Reader (Ly)
4.2. Interpretation. The user/learner acts as an intermediary in a face-to-face interaction between two interlocutors who do not share the same language or code, receiving a text in one language (Lx) and producing a corresponding text in the other (Ly).
Interlocutor (Lx) |
↔ discourse (Lx) |
↔ USER ↔ discourse (Ly) |
↔ Interlocutor (Ly) |
Interlocutor (Lx) |
→ Text (Lx1) |
→ USER → Text (Ly1) |
→ Interlocutor (Ly) |
Interlocutor (Lx) |
← Text (Lx2) |
← USER ← Text (Ly2) |
← Interlocutor (Ly) |
Interlucutor (Lx) |
→ Text (Lx3) |
→ USER → Text (Ly3) |
→ Interlocutor (Ly) |
Interlocutor (Lx) |
← Text (Lx4) |
← USER ← Text (Ly4) |
← Interlocutor (Ly) |
etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to interaction and mediation activities as defined above, there are many activities in which the user/learner is required to produce a textual response to a textual stimulus. The textual stimulus may be an oral question, a set of written instructions (e.g. an examination rubric), a discursive text, authentic or composed, etc. or some combination of these. The required textual response may be anything from a single word to a threehour essay. Both input and output texts may be spoken or written and in L1 or L2. The relation between the two texts may be meaning-preserving or not. Accordingly, even if we overlook the part which may be played in the teaching/learning of modern languages by activities in which the learner produces an L1 text in response to an L1 stimulus (as may often be the case with regard to the sociocultural component), some 24 activity types may be distinguished. For example, the following cases (Table 6) in which both input and output are in the target language.
Whilst such text-to-text activities have a place in everyday language use, they are particularly frequent in language learning/teaching and testing. The more mechanical meaning-preserving activities (repetition, dictation, reading aloud, phonetic transcription) are currently out of favour in communication-oriented language teaching owing to their artificiality and what are seen as undesirable backwash effects. A case can perhaps be made for them as testing devices for the technical reason that performance depends
99
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment
Table 6. Text-to-text activities
Input text |
|
Output text |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medium |
Language |
Medium |
Language |
Meaning |
Activity type |
|
|
|
preserving |
preserving |
(examples) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
spoken |
L2 |
spoken |
L2 |
Yes |
repetition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
spoken |
L2 |
written |
L2 |
Yes |
dictation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
spoken |
L2 |
spoken |
L2 |
No |
oral |
|
|
|
|
|
question/ |
|
|
|
|
|
answer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
spoken |
L2 |
written |
L2 |
No |
written |
|
|
|
|
|
answers to |
|
|
|
|
|
oral L2 |
|
|
|
|
|
questions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
written |
L2 |
spoken |
L2 |
Yes |
reading aloud |
|
|
|
|
|
|
written |
L2 |
written |
L2 |
Yes |
copying, |
|
|
|
|
|
transcription |
|
|
|
|
|
|
written |
L2 |
spoken |
L2 |
No |
spoken |
|
|
|
|
|
response to |
|
|
|
|
|
written L2 |
|
|
|
|
|
rubric |
|
|
|
|
|
|
written |
L2 |
written |
L2 |
No |
writing in |
|
|
|
|
|
response to |
|
|
|
|
|
written L2 |
|
|
|
|
|
rubric |
|
|
|
|
|
|
closely on the ability to use linguistic competences to reduce the information content of the text. In any case, the advantage of examining all possible combinations of categories in taxonomic sets is not only that it enables experience to be ordered, but also that it reveals gaps and suggests new possibilities.
100