pathways to proficiency20to%20proficiency.pdf · pathways to proficiency the research enquiry was...
TRANSCRIPT
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
Pathways to Proficiency
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
The Qualifications and CurriculumAuthority (QCA) would like to thankRichard West (University of Manchester)and Nigel Reeves (Aston University) as the principal researchers and authors ofthis report and Angela Simpson, the mainconsultant on the project. We are alsograteful to the DfES Adult Basic SkillsStrategy Unit for its support for this work.
The Unit has funded the research and this publication as part of the Skills for Life strategy. The work will provide afoundation for the second round ofaccreditation of qualifications in Englishlanguage in 2004. The ABSSU is alsosupporting associated QCA developmentsincluding the preparation of guidance foraccreditation of ESOL specifications, andmaterials to illustrate standards in writingby ESOL students from Entry 1 to Level 2.
In addition, thanks are due to members ofthe awarding bodies who devoted time toreading and commenting on the workthroughout its preparation.
For any enquiries about this research,please contact:
Janet WhiteEnglish team, QCA Tel: 020 7509 5734
Liz LawsonAdult Basic Skills Strategy Unit, DfES Tel: 020 7273 1382
Acknowledgements
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
Introduction Background to the research 03
Section 1 How the language scales were aligned: the research methodology 06
Section 2 Descriptions of the scales: the spectrum of language proficiency 17
Section 3 Maps illustrating the alignment of scales and levels 25
Section 4 Next steps 48
Section 5 Summary and conclusions 50
Appendix List of standards, scales and associated literature 52
Key to abbreviations 53
Pull-out-and-keep poster Mapping different language assessment scalesThe alignment of language proficiency scales back page
Contents
The immediate background to the workreported here is the accreditation ofqualifications to the national qualificationsframework (NQF): the process wherebyawarding bodies submit their specificationto the regulatory authorities for reviewagainst published criteria, in order to seekaccredited status. Accreditation indicatesthat a qualification is fit for purpose at theappropriate level and that the awardingbody has suitable systems in place toguarantee valid and reliable assessment.The accreditation system and the nationalqualifications framework enable users tosee the relationship between accreditedqualifications from different awardingbodies and at different levels, and henceassist them to make the appropriatechoices for learning and progression.
Planning for the accreditation of generalEnglish language qualifications began in2000. In consultation with awardingbodies, QCA invited the submission of all these qualifications at the same time,irrespective of whether they were primarilyfor users of English as a first or otherlanguage. It was also decided to definequalifications for speakers of otherlanguages as the ‘ESOL family’, whetherthey had hitherto been regarded as EFL orESOL qualifications, in acknowledgementthat these boundaries were no longerclear-cut. The scope of the accreditationcovered all qualifications available tocandidates in England, dealing withcompetence in one or more modes of communication in English.
The outcome of these decisions was thatfrom January 2001 a range of English-related qualifications was submitted toQCA, the great majority in the areas ofbasic skills adult literacy and ESOL.Qualifications in key skills communication,AS and A-level English Language hadbeen accredited earlier.
Historically there have been no formalsystems for relating ESOL or EFLqualifications used in England toqualifications primarily for native speakers.In some cases, informal ‘equivalences’have grown up over time. Theaccreditation process brought these factssharply to light. In 2001, for the first time,there were nationally agreed definitions of proficiency in English relating to the NQF: the adult literacy standards. Theseset out the skills and capabilities neededfor Speaking and Listening, Reading andWriting at three levels from Entry level(subdivided into Entry 1, Entry 2 and Entry 3) to Level 1 and Level 2 for all adult users of English, whether as a first or other language.
The adult literacy standards provided thestarting point for the work described in this report, which set out to examine howthese standards might be cross referred toother language proficiency scales used byawarding bodies to determine the levels oftheir qualifications. It must be stressed thatthe work described here is not aboutcomparing qualification with qualification.
03
Introduction: background to the research
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
The research enquiry was concerned withscrutinising, comparing and ultimatelycross-referring a selection of differentscales for measuring language proficiency.In some cases these scales are designedto be applied to any modern language, not specifically English.
The research makes no assumptionsabout the needs of different groups oflearners who might be aiming for the samelevel of competence. The research wasnot concerned with the teaching andlearning required to achieve competenceat particular levels, nor with how thesemight differ for ESOL users and firstlanguage users. Clearly the needs ofstudents working at the same level arelikely to differ, for example in terms oflength of time required to achieve the level,most appropriate teaching styles andteaching materials.
QCA’s original schedule for accreditation of English qualifications was timed to takeaccount of the findings published in A Fresh Start 1. That report recommended a national strategy and targets for basicskills, national standards, a national corecurriculum based on these standards and a national system of qualifications.Subsequently, the Government’s Skills for Life strategy has supported the development of all these. As well asthe national standards for adult literacy,
there are now core curricula for literacy,numeracy and ESOL aligned to thesestandards, a pre-entry curriculumframework for literacy and numeracy, and newly accredited qualifications atEntry Level for adult literacy and numeracy,and national tests at Level 1 and Level 2.
A Fresh Start did not directly address the needs of people with first languagesother than English. The subsequent report Breaking the Language Barriers 2,examined the needs of ESOL learners and made a series of recommendationsdesigned to give them access to highquality, relevant English language provisionleading to nationally recognisedqualifications. The remit of the Adult BasicSkills Strategy Unit established within theDfES in 2000 includes language, as wellas literacy and numeracy, and the Unitcurrently oversees a wide range ofinitiatives associated with ESOL.
These developments were just beginningat the time when the first sets ofqualifications in ESOL were beingconsidered for accreditation, and theESOL curriculum had not yet beenpublished. Qualifications submitted in the ‘ESOL family’ had to demonstrate their relevance to the needs of Englishlanguage users living in this country byincluding some coverage of the skills,knowledge and understanding in the
04 INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND TO THE RESEARCH
1 A Fresh Start Improving literacy and numeracy. The report of the working group chaired by Sir Claus Moser, DFEE, 1999
2 DfES, 2000
adult literacy standards and the Key SkillsCommunication Specifications. Thosequalifications submitted and accredited todate have all been existing qualificationswhich were able to make any necessaryadjustments to meet these requirements. It has been agreed with awarding bodiesthat for the second round of accreditationin 2004, all qualifications in the ESOLfamily submitted at Entry 1 to Level 2 willinclude coverage of the ESOL curriculumat the appropriate levels.
In the meantime, as a result of the workreported here, it has been possible toaccredit some ESOL qualifications at theappropriate level in the NQF, alongsidequalifications designed for first languageusers with some confidence that they are‘broadly equivalent’. This is a significantstep towards the long term aim of atransparent and progressive system of high quality qualifications in Englishlanguage for all users in this country,whatever their language background.
The work reported here also has relevancefor the future development andaccreditation of adult literacy qualifications.In establishing a system of alignmentacross several sets of language scales itprovides a basis for further development of shared understanding about whatconstitutes language performance atdifferent levels. The research also paves
the way for future work in the context of adult literacy and ESOL qualificationscollectively, for example in developingconsistent interpretation of the standardsin terms of expectations of performance at different levels and appropriateassessment tasks.
The common system of alignment ofqualifications in English within the NQF,which this mapping research makespossible, does not mean that allqualifications will be the same, or that the same approaches to teaching andlearning will necessarily be appropriate.Qualifications will continue to differ, forexample in the extent of coverage ofparticular language modes, and in thecontent and emphasis provided fordifferent client groups. However, such asystem will make it easier for teachers andeducational managers to select the mostappropriate qualification and level for theirstudents, and to plan for progression inEnglish and in other disciplines.
QCAAugust 2002
05
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
1.1The scope of the researchThe investigation reported here wasoriginally commissioned by theDepartment of Education and Skills (DfES)and the Qualifications and CurriculumAuthority (QCA) as a preliminary to theaccreditation of language qualifications inESOL/EFL within the United Kingdom’snational qualifications framework. Theinvestigation examined the feasibility ofaligning scales which describe languageproficiency in various related sectors: adult literacy and communication, English for Speakers of Other Languages(ESOL)/English as an Additional Language(EAL), English as a Foreign Language(EFL), and Modern Foreign Languages(MFL).
Proficiency scales describe the languagethat can be expected of users at aspecified number of levels. They consist of descriptors of what language users cando with the target language at each level.Scales have been in use for over 50 yearsfor a variety of purposes: defining thelanguage level needed to carry out aparticular job, assessing a learner’s currentlevel of language proficiency, describing a learner’s current level of proficiency, and comparing the levels of languageexaminations and qualifications. Such
scales have been used in a number ofeducational sectors: mother tongue,second/additional language, and foreignlanguage. Language proficiency scales,even within the same sector, have rarelybeen systematically aligned with eachother, so that it has been difficult to matchthe levels on one scale with those onothers.
The questions which the research soughtto answer were:
i) Is it possible to align the mostcommonly-used scales for describinglanguage proficiency to enable crossreference between them?
ii) Given that the principal scales forliteracy and communication in England(the national adult literacy standardsand the Key Skills Specifications) are already linked to the nationalqualifications framework (NQF), is itpossible to align other scales to thesescales and hence to the NQF?
iii) Given that the adult literacy standardsand the Key Skills Specificationsdescribe proficiency in English atdifferent levels for people living,studying and working in the UK, couldlanguage scales specifically designed
06 SECTION 1 HOW THE LANGUAGE SCALES WERE ALIGNED: THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Section 1How the language scales werealigned: the research methodology
to describe performance in second orother languages be aligned to them,thus identifying some equivalencebetween different scales with differentpurposes and from different sectors?
iv) If these questions could be answeredpositively, could the alignmentsidentified serve as a practical tool forassigning qualifications in English fromvarious sectors to levels in the nationalqualifications framework (and hencerelate them to the mainstreamqualifications system of the UK),irrespective of whether qualificationswere designed for native or non-nativespeakers of English?
To answer these questions it wasnecessary to find a way of aligning theEuropean language scales to which mostESOL qualifications are mapped, to thenational adult literacy standards and theKey Skills Communication Specifications,the scales now in place to measurecommunicative proficiency in Englishlanguage in this country. The investigationconcluded that such alignment of scaleswas feasible and the proposals werepresented to QCA and the DfES in mid-2001. That report was then put out toconsultation with Awarding Bodies andother interested parties in the autumn of2001. The conclusions of the consultationhave been taken into account in thisreport. The initial purpose of the researchhas already been fulfilled, in that theresults of the 2001 report have beenapplied in accrediting ESOL qualificationsto the NQF.
It is envisaged, however, that themethodology used in aligning the scaleswill be of interest to a range of readers,including language learners and users,teachers, examiners and other languageprofessionals, admissions tutors ineducational institutions and employers (see section 3.4.2 below).
1.2Summary of researchmethodologyThe research into the methods andfeasibility of aligning various languagescales was carried out in seven stages:
i) data gathering and selection:appropriate scales and associateddocumentation were gathered and the principal scales to be investigatedwere identified
ii) establishing the bases for comparison
iii) preliminary alignment of the levels ofdifferent proficiency scales
iv) refinement of the initial alignments
v) drafting of skills maps (Maps 3-6:listening, speaking, reading and writing)
vi) verification of alignment of levels
vii) summary of findings (Map 1: OverallLanguage Proficiency and Map 2:General Language Proficiency).
07
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
1.3Investigation of the scalesand the outcome
1.3.1 Data gathering and selection
The consultants’ terms of reference statedthat the scales of language proficiency tobe investigated should include the mostwidely-used scales from three mainsectors: adult literacy and key skillscommunication, English for Speakers ofOther Languages/English as an AdditionalLanguage, and Modern ForeignLanguages. These scales were thenidentified and collected. This involvedobtaining the latest versions, some ofwhich had been through several editions,as well as the associated literature (seeAppendix).
The investigation was restricted todocuments currently in use in varioussectors of language education in theUnited Kingdom, and did not includescales from North America or Australia.Five scales were identified as being themost appropriate for the research. Allcome from the sectors identified and are in the public domain. This was felt to beimportant in assisting the objectivity andtransparency of the exercise.
The five scales were:
The national standards for adult literacy
Key Skills CommunicationSpecifications
A language in common: assessingEnglish as an additional language(QCA)
Common European Framework ofReference for Languages
The National Language Standards
In addition, two scales, The English-Speaking Union Framework and The Association of Testers in EuropeFramework were considered but omittedfrom the alignment maps because they are proprietary scales and not in the public domain in the manner of the others considered.
1.3.2Bases for comparisonInitially, there was concern that the scaleswere too diverse for alignment to bepossible, for the following reasons:
The sectors of language usedescribed. Some scales describemother tongue proficiency, while others describe language used as anadditional (second or foreign) language.Comparison of language proficiencyacross sectors had not previously been attempted.
08 SECTION 1 HOW THE LANGUAGE SCALES WERE ALIGNED: THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The number of proficiency levels.The number of levels in different scalesranged from five to eleven. It was alsoevident that several scales did notattempt to describe the full range oflanguage proficiency, but insteadconcentrated on the middle-range withrelatively little description at the upperand lower ends of language use.
The lack of common criteria ofdescription. While scales used inlanguage assessment usually describelanguage according to clearly-definedcriteria such as accuracy, range and soon, some of the scales investigatedhere describe general languageproficiency without such explicit criteria.
Fullness of description.The scales and their descriptors variedconsiderably in breadth and depth ofdescription. The thinnest was set outon a single sheet describing proficiencyin terms of the four skills of reading,writing, listening and speaking; othersrequired several chapters or evencomplete manuals to describe variousapplications of the skills.
However, beneath this initial perception of difference were similarities of approachwhich made it possible to progress withthe task. These similarities derive fromwhat may be described as the Britishtradition of writing language scales. TheCouncil of Europe (2001: 205) contraststhis tradition with the American/Australiantradition and characterises it as preferringpositiveness, definiteness, clarity, brevityand independence of description. Thiscommon tradition means that descriptorsare expressed in terms that facilitatedcomparison between one scale andanother. In particular, it was found that allthe scales described language proficiencyin the following ways:
Orientation. The scales were initiallywritten for purposes of planninglanguage learning at institutional,national or international levels, althoughsome have subsequently been appliedto language assessment.
Descriptive approach. The scalestake a purely descriptive approach,describing language proficiency atvarious levels in much the way that a thermometer describes temperatureon a scale. This approach focuses onactual language performance, andseeks to eliminate subjective andrelative concerns such as the length of time that learners have beenlearning, their age, intelligence orbehaviour, or the linguistic distancebetween the learners’ first languageand the language they are learning.
09
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
Adult users. With the exception of A language in common the scalesdescribe language proficiency of adultusers, that is the performance of userswho are all cognitively mature.
Output models. The scales describelanguage proficiency in terms of acompetence-based output (thelanguage user’s performance in termsof reading, writing, listening andspeaking) rather than language input(the number of hours of tuition or the number of points on a languagesyllabus that the user had to master).Because of this output-basedapproach, all the scales investigatedare framed in ‘can-do’ statementsdescribing what language users arecapable of in the target language.
Layered construction. The scales take a variety of approaches to thepresentation and description of thedifferent layers of language proficiency.For example, the thinnest, the KeySkills Communication specifications are written for the learner and combinefeatures from different layers ofdescription on single A4 sheets foreach level. The adult literacy standardsprovide amplification of the key skillsand include considerably more detailabout the skills involved in eachlanguage mode, at the same time
bringing together features from differentlayers on a single A3 sheet per level.This explicitly multi-layered approachcan also be seen in the The NationalLanguage Standards and The CommonEuropean Framework. All these scales,although they are written with differentdegrees of detail, include: some‘global’ scale of language proficiency,derived scales describing performanceaccording to skill (reading, writing,listening and speaking), and a third‘layer’ describing performance inparticular applications (e.g. speaking atmeetings/discussions or writing letters).This multi-layered construction (calledthe ‘hypertext analogy’ by the Councilof Europe (2000: 40)) can berepresented in the following way:
10 SECTION 1 HOW THE LANGUAGE SCALES WERE ALIGNED: THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Layer 3
Applications (e.g. to writing)
Layer 2Language skills
(reading, writing, listening speaking)
Layer 1Global language proficiency
This approach means that all the scalesoffer aligned descriptions across a number of levels, even though the precisestructure, amount of description andallocation of description between the threelayers may differ somewhat. The user can,for example, find a general descriptor at a particular level at layer 1, then see howthis is converted into a more detaileddescriptor of a skill such as writing, at the same level, and then locate theapplications of the skill, usually in layer 3.This process is set out below withillustrations from the standards for adultliteracy for Entry 2 Writing, and from theCommon European Framework, level A2,for Writing.
11
Layer 3
Applicationsin documents such as forms, lists, messages, notes, records, e-mails, simple narratives
National standards for adult literacy, QCA 2000
Layer 2Writing
An adult will be expected to:
use written words and phrases to record and present information
construct simple sentences and compound sentences using common conjunctions to connect tow clauses, eg as, and, but
use adjectives
use punctuation correctly, eg capital letters, full stops and question marks
use a capital letter for proper nouns
spell correctly the majority of personal details and familiar common words
produce legible text
National standards for adult literacy, QCA 2000
Layer 1General Proficiency
E2At this level, adults can:
write to communicate information with some awareness of the intended audience
National standards for adult literacy, QCA 2000
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
All of the similarities of approach describedabove, in particular the layered nature ofthe scales, facilitated their comparison andenabled finer matching to be undertaken.
1.3.3Preliminary alignmentAs all scales include what has beentermed layer 2: description of reading,writing, listening and speaking, they were scrutinised at this layer first and a preliminary alignment was drafted in
a series of maps. This was achieved byestablishing the initial match between the broad descriptors of each of the skillsat layer 2 of each scale. The method foraligning the layer 2 descriptors of threedifferent scales: The adult literacystandards, The Common EuropeanFramework and The National LanguageStandards is demonstrated in the followingexamples from the descriptions of writingat the lower end of the scales. Thedescriptors of the various lower levels
12 SECTION 1 HOW THE LANGUAGE SCALES WERE ALIGNED: THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Layer 3
ApplicationsCREATIVE WRITING
A2
Can write about everyday aspects of his/her environment, eg people, places, a job or studyexperience in linked sentences
Can write a series of simple phrases and sentences about their family, living conditions, educational background, present or most recent job
Can write short simple, imaginary biographies and simple poems about people
CORRESPONDENCES
A2
Can write very simple personal letters expressing thanks and apology
NOTES, MESSAGES and FORMS
A2
Can take a short, simple message provided he/shecan ask for repetition and reformulation. Can write short, simple notes and messages relating to matters in areas of immediate need
Common European Framework p.62, 83, 84
Layer 2Writing
A2
Can write a series of simple phrases and sentences linked with simple connectors like ‘and’ and ‘but’ and ‘because’
Common European Framework p.61
Layer 1General Proficiency
A2
Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (eg. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment)
Can communicate in simple routine tasks requiring a simple direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters
Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need
Common European Framework p.24
were placed side-by-side and scrutinisedfor similarities and differences at levelsabove and below. This would indicatepreliminary alignment and a provisionalanswer to the question as to which levelsof each scale (A1 or A2 on the CommonEuropean Framework; Levels 1 or 2 of theNational Language Standards) should bealigned with Entry 2 of the adult literacystandards.
13
Entry level 2 An adult can:
write a message to a colleague on work issues
write a brief letter or postcard
use written words and phrases to record or present information
construct simple and compoundsentences, using conjunctions to connect two clauses, eg as, and, but
use adjectives
use punctuation correctly, eg capital letters, full stops and question marks
use a capital letter for proper nouns
spell correctly the majority of personal details and familiar common words
produce legible text
use a simplified dictionary to find meanings and spell words
in documents such as forms, lists,messages, notes, records, e-mails,simple narratives
Adult literacy standards
A1 Breakthrough The writer can:
write simple isolated phrases and sentences
A2 Waystage The writer can:
write a series of simple phrases and sentences linked with simple connectors like and, but and because
Common EuropeanFramework
Level 1: The writer can:
write effectively to deal with predictable day-to-day activities
write down routine facts and data related to predictable day-to-day activities
write simple messages
Level 2: The writer can:
write effectively to deal with routine and daily activities
compile routine records using set phrases and structures
compose notes and short messages to fulfil routine and daily requirements
compose correspondence usingset phrases and structures
National LanguageStandards
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
The different scales offer different levels of detail in their descriptions of writing.However, during the scrutiny, it becameclear that there were some key descriptorswhich suggested a preliminary equivalencebetween the scales at different levels. In this example, the comparison of keydescriptors resulted in the preliminaryalignment of the levels shown here:
This preliminary alignment was madeacross all of the four skills and an initial ‘fit’ was established.
1.3.4 RefinementIt was found that the preliminary alignmentof layer 2 left gaps: one scale includedmore detail than another, or one gaveexemplification that the others lacked. Themulti-layered construction enabled detailto be recovered from layer 3 of the scales,so that more direct comparisons of thedescriptors at layer 2 could be made. Forexample, the writing descriptors of onescale might be exemplified by reference toreport writing, while the others made no
mention of this; but references for reportwriting were included at layer 3 of theother scales. The placing of layer 3 detailalongside layer 2 enabled more directcomparisons to be made. In the illustrationbelow (taken from Map 6: Writing Skills),the additional descriptors recovered fromlayer 3 are indicated in italics. It can beseen that the detailed descriptors on thethree scales are now more comparableboth in extent and delicacy.
14 SECTION 1 HOW THE LANGUAGE SCALES WERE ALIGNED: THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Entry level 2 An adult can:
construct simple and compoundsentences, using conjunctions to connect two clauses, eg as, and, but
Adult literacy standards
A2 Waystage The writer can:
write a series of simple phrases and sentences linked with simple connectors like and, but and because
Common EuropeanFramework
Level 1:
write simple messages
National LanguageStandards
15
Entry level 2 An adult can:
write a message to a colleague on work issues
write a brief letter or postcard
use written words and phrases to record or present information
construct simple and compoundsentences, using conjunctions to connect two clauses, eg as, and, but
use adjectives
use punctuation correctly, eg capital letters, full stops and question marks
use a capital letter for proper nouns
spell correctly the majority of personal details and familiar common words
produce legible text
use a simplified dictionary to find meanings and spell words
in documents such as forms, lists,messages, notes, records, e-mails,simple narratives
Source: QCA national standards foradult literacy and numeracy, 2000
Adult literacy standards
A2 Waystage The writer can:
write a series of simple phrases and sentences linked with simple connectors like and, but and because
write short, simple formulaic notes relating to matters in areas of immediate need
copy short sentences on everyday subjects, e.g directionshow to get somewhere
write with reasonable phonetic accuracy (but not necessarily fully standard spelling) short words that are in his/her oral vocabulary
write short, simple formulaic notes relating to matters in areas of immediate need
write very simple personal letters expressing thanks and apology
take a short, simple message provided he/she can ask for repetition and reformulation
Common European Framework, p.61, 83, 84, 89, 118
Common EuropeanFramework
Level 1: The writer can effectively:
deal with predictable day-to-day activities
write down routine facts and data related to predictable day-to-day activities
write simple messages
use the written form of the language in a limited range of standard formats, eg filling in standard forms or composing standard letters using stock phrases and formats
use a small number of memorised sentences and individual words and set phrases, which he/she can substitute to adapt existing simple texts
The National Language Standards,p.107
National LanguageStandards
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
1.3.5 Drafting of skills mapsFrom this refinement, the four skills maps(Map 3: Listening, Map 4: Speaking, Map 5: Reading and Map 6: Writing) weredrafted, referencing direct quotations fromthe wording of the original scales. Thealignment of the descriptors at all levels on these maps illustrates the fit of thevarious scales in a transparent way.
1.3.6 VerificationFurther verification was sought byreference to other data. Although noprevious attempts have been made to map all the scales examined in thisresearch, there were some sources ofinformation about more limited mapping of some of the scales, and these wereconsulted. Some of these weredocuments in the public domain (such asthe Association of British ESOL ExaminingBoards Framework, published 2001) andothers drew on professional knowledge. Inaddition, a summary of the first draft of the
report, together with the maps showingthe alignments, was circulated, to seek the views of awarding bodies and otherinterested parties, before a more extensiveconsultation took place. There were nosuggestions that the alignment of thescales on any of the maps was incorrector unacceptable.
1.3.7 Summary of findingsTwo summary maps (Maps 1 and 2)showing overall alignment were drawn up from Maps 3-6. Map 1 shows only thebroad alignment of each scale against theNQF, while Map 2 includes descriptors ofgeneral language proficiency. While it isrealised that these are the maps which arelikely to be most widely used, it is hopedthat users will understand that they are the least detailed in terms of languageapplications, so may not be the maps that are most useful or relevant in allcircumstances.
16 SECTION 1 HOW THE LANGUAGE SCALES WERE ALIGNED: THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
2.1Spectrum of languageproficiencyThe scales listed in 1.3.1 and 1.3.2, whichare considered individually below, tend to concentrate on the broad range ofproficiency within which most users’performance falls, whether in a first orother language, although there are somewhich offer description for the very top of the scale or for the beginner stage. Forexample, at Level 5, Key Skills describes a level of communicative competencecommensurate with the demands of high level management or research. TheEnglish-Speaking Union Framework coversthe full range of proficiency in its nine-level
scale, but as this was ultimately notchosen for alignment, A language incommon (QCA) was consulted fordescriptions of the very earliest stages.
2.2The scalesThe scales cover language proficiency inthe context of literacy and communication,English as a foreign or other language,other modern foreign languages:
Some of the scales have associatedsupplementary scales or literature, andthese are referred to where appropriate.
It will also be noted that some scales refer to the UK (or England) alone,whereas others are European in scope.
17
Section 2Descriptions of the scales: the spectrum of language proficiency
LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
LITERACY/COMMUNICATION (UK)
The adult literacy standards
Key Skills Communication Specifications
EFL/ESOL/EAL
The Common European Framework
A language in common
MODERN FOREIGNLANGUAGES
The National Language Standards
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
2.3The national qualificationsframework (NQF)This framework supplied the levels whichwere used as the basis for the alignmentof the language scales. Established in1999 it provides a structure within whichall accredited qualifications in all subjectsin the UK can be located. It has fiveprincipal levels [1-5], and below those,Entry 1-3. The following table displays thelevels of the NQF alongside other relevantnational standards:
18 SECTION 2 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SCALES: THE SPECTRUM OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
National qualificationsframework Level 5
(Higher level qualifications)
National qualificationsframework Level 4
National qualificationsframework Level 3
(e.g. A level)
National qualificationsframework Level 2
(e.g. GCSE grades A*-C)
National qualificationsframework Level 1
(e.g. GCSE grades D-G)
E3
E2
E1
Key SkillsLevel 5
Key SkillsLevel 4
Key SkillsLevel 3
Key SkillsLevel 2
Key SkillsLevel 1
Adult literacy standardsLevel 2
Adult literacy standardsLevel 1
Adult literacy standardsEntry 3
Adult literacy standardsEntry 2
Adult literacy standardsEntry 1
National Curriculum Level 5
National Curriculum Level 4
National Curriculum Level 3
National Curriculum Level 2
National Curriculum Level 1
The NQF does not set out to definecompetence or proficiency in particularsubjects. Its aim is to provide atransparent system of cross reference to demonstrate how different types ofqualification can be regarded as broadlyequivalent in terms of level, for thepurposes of progression and entryrequirements to employment or further study.
Scales for assessingcommunication in English in the United Kingdom
2.4National standards for adult literacy (QCA)These were published by QCA in 2000 in order to ‘specify the full range of skillsrequired for an adult to communicateconfidently, effectively and efficiently’(2000: 2). The standards are described at five levels and are aligned to the levelsof the national qualifications framework, as demonstrated above.
Several important points need to be noted in relation to the national standardsfor adult literacy which affect theirinterpretation in the current research.
The standards are written in ‘plainEnglish’ for an intended audience ofeducational professionals rather thanadult learners themselves, as is thecase with most of the other scalessurveyed.
While ‘literacy’ is not explicitly definedin the standards, it includes spokencommunication. It is described in terms of the four skills: reading, writing,speak to communicate and listen and respond. Reading and writingdescriptors include text, sentence and word level skills.
The national standards for adult literacycover level 2 at the top end and beginat Entry 1, which corresponds toNational Curriculum level 1. It is evidentthat Entry 1 in these Standards, likeNational Curriculum level 1, does notbegin with the very earliest stages oflearning a language. Some basic abilityin spoken communication in English isassumed, which may be the result ofbeing a native speaker, or may havebeen already acquired as a secondlanguage speaker. (See A language in common 2.3.2.d below)
The standards were written to describethe levels of language competenceneeded by adult speakers of Englishliving, working and studying in thiscountry, whether English is their firstlanguage or not. They have now beenused as the starting point fordeveloping the Adult Literacy CoreCurriculum (DfES/BSA 2001), designedfor native speakers, and the AdultBasic Skills ESOL Core Curriculum(DfES/BSA 2001), which relatesspecifically to non-native speakers ofEnglish. Through these curricula, eachrelated to the same standards, explicitlinks have been made between theproficiency levels of native and non-
19
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
native speakers of English in wayswhich were not possible before. Eachcurriculum is designed to cover theskills required by users of English in this country, taking account ofdifferences in curriculum content,teaching and learning for ESOL and first language learners.
2.5Key Skills Specifications(QCA)These specifications in their current formwere produced by QCA in 1999. At levels1-4 they describe six skills, includingCommunication, which is the concern ofthis report. The Key Skills CommunicationSpecifications were particularly useful inthe investigation as, in effect, they extendto NQF levels 3, 4 and 5 (see Map 1).
The Key Skills Specifications areaddressed directly to post-16 learnersrather than to professionals, as with theadult literacy standards. They make no reference to non-native speakers,but like the adult literacy standardsdescribe the levels of competencerequired to do certain things in English,with the assumption that these apply toboth native and non-native speakers inthe context of education, employmentand day-to-day living in this country
The Key Skills CommunicationSpecifications pre-date the adultliteracy standards and influenced theirpreparation. At levels 1 and 2 the twoscales have close overlap, though
written for different audiences. In thisresearch, levels 3, 4 and 5 of the KeySkills Communication Specificationswere regarded as an extension of theadult literacy standards beyond level 2,facilitating comparisons with otherscales at the higher levels. At level 3 and 4, the CommunicationSpecifications were closely referred to. At level 5 Key Skills Communicationdoes not separate communication or literacy from other areas ofcompetence, but it clearly describes a level of language attainment which is well beyond that of level 4. Level 3and 4 of the Key Skills specificationalso provided the basis for thedevelopment of the SubjectSpecifications for teachers of adultliteracy and numeracy, DfES/FENTO2001, which set out the skills,knowledge and understanding forspeaking, listening, reading and writingat levels 3 and 4.
The adult literacy standards and KeySkills Communication Specificationswere combined to make one overallscale for use in the Maps [Section 3],which goes from Entry 1 to level 4.
20 SECTION 2 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SCALES: THE SPECTRUM OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
2.6A language in common:assessing English as anadditional language (QCA)
A language in common (2000: 11-15)was consulted to give an indication ofwhat descriptors at the lowest levelsmight look like. The booklet waspublished in 2000 and relatesspecifically to English as an additionallanguage (EAL) within the school-basednational curriculum. As such, it fallsoutside the scope of this report, whichdeals with adult scales. However,reference was made to it because it offers a description of levels ofobservable proficiency below nationalcurriculum level 1. With minoradaptation, these could also be appliedto describe adult proficiency in theearliest stages of learning Englishbelow NQF Entry 1 and may in futureprovide a starting point for descriptionsof beginner levels for adults.
Scales referring to a rangeof languages
2.7Common EuropeanFramework of Reference for Languages (CEF)The Council of Europe Frameworkdescribes six levels of foreign-languageproficiency. The document was originallycirculated in draft in 1996, with anupdated draft in 1997. The final editionwas published in 2001. The frameworkprovides several dozen scales, rangingfrom general proficiency to narrow sub-skills such as ‘transactions to obtaingoods and services’, all described at the same six levels. In the original edition,the levels were given labels such as‘Threshold’ and ‘Vantage’, but these havebeen dropped in the published edition,although they are still widely used and are given here for reference (see Map 1).
Several points should be noted about theCommon European Framework:
levels refer specifically to proficiency ina language which is not the user’s firstlanguage;
levels of language proficiency aredescribed without any relation toeducational level. While this is similar to the other scales considered in this report, it is a departure fromeducational practice in many European countries;
21
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
unlike other scales, it was not originallydevised as a framework for assessmentor for qualifications, although it isincreasingly used as such. Indeed,many countries (including the UnitedKingdom) are now aligning proficiencyin foreign languages at variouseducational levels to the CEF, oftenthrough the European LanguagePortfolio [LNTO/CILT 2002];
although much of the Council ofEurope’s work was originally withadults, the scale makes little referenceto vocational uses of language. It is, however, now frequently used to describe school-basedproficiency/achievement;
it includes very full and detaileddescriptors which proved most usefulin checking and refining the alignmentswith other scales;
it provides a link between scales usedonly in England and a scale which iswell-established and well-regardedacross Europe, thus making theproposed alignments of levels ofEnglish proficiency intelligible to users beyond England.
2.8The National LanguageStandards 2000 (LNTO)The National Language Standards 2000,produced by the Languages NationalTraining Organisation is one of many sets of national standards in a variety ofvocational areas and skills, which havebeen produced by national trainingorganisations and industry lead bodies.They are the second revision of standardsoriginally published in 1993, and definestandards for the vocational use ofModern Foreign Languages as applied to the use of these languages in theworkplace.
The Standards define proficiency in thetarget language at five levels, aligned to the national qualifications frameworklevels in the context of Modern ForeignLanguages rather than for mother-tongueEnglish, and were related originally to the competency statements of the UKNational Vocational Qualifications. Whilethe standards describe proficiency levelsprimarily of non-native speakers, their use to confirm or accredit mother-tongueproficiency for defined work purposes is approved by the Languages NationalTraining Organisation.
Several points need to be highlighted inthe context of this report with regard tothe National Language Standards:
their developers consulted theCommon European Framework todefine the stages of progression [The
22 SECTION 2 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SCALES: THE SPECTRUM OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
National Language Standards in ActionLNTO 2001:30]. This provides somelink between the scales written for usein England, and the European scale,which assisted the processes ofalignment;
they were specifically designed toassess competence in any languageother than the user’s first language; thisincludes any foreign, second/additional,community (eg Bengali, Turkish) orindigenous language (eg Welsh, Gaelic).Their application is thus wider than theother scales originating in England, andrather different to the CEF;
they are described in terms of the fourskills: reading, writing, listening andspeaking (layer 2) which are thenexpanded in a series of tables of‘typical attainments’ in specificapplication (layer 3) thus facilitatingcomparison with the other scales;
they provide the basis for NationalVocational Qualifications language unitsin foreign languages. These have a levelby level correspondence within theNQF (ie an NVQ unit at level 2 is atlevel 2 in the NQF). In the context of the mapping reported here, allalignments to the NQF have beenmade by comparison to levels oflanguage skills in English. The effect of this is that the levels of the NationalLanguage Standards do not have thesame one to one correspondence withthe levels of the NQF when applied toEnglish, as Maps 1 to 6 demonstrate.
Scales outside the publicdomain
2.9 Association of LanguageTesters of Europe (ALTE)ALTE was established in 1990 as anassociation between various language testproviders across Europe. ALTE developedits own Framework of five (later six) levelsand subsequently aligned these with thelevels of the Common EuropeanFramework.
Points to be noted:
The ALTE scale is designed to be usedfor foreign languages and not withnative speakers. It describes languageproficiency regardless of educationallevel.
The 2001 version of the scales relatesboth to general proficiency in the fourskills and to social/tourist, work andstudy applications.
Although the levels of the ALTE scalehave been aligned with those of theCouncil of Europe (see CommonEuropean Framework 2001: 248-49),the descriptors of the two scales aredifferent and the relationship betweenthe two is not necessarily obvious tothe user.
23
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
ALTE is generally restricted to oneexamination provider per language andother providers may not use the ALTEscale. The ALTE English-language memberis the University of Cambridge LocalExaminations Syndicate (UCLES). TheALTE Framework can be used only bymembers of the Association and is thusnot in the public domain. For this reason, it was not included in the maps in thisreport.
2.10The English-Speaking UnionFramework (ESU)This is a scale describing foreign-languageproficiency at nine levels, covering the full range of proficiency from beginner to educated bilingual. It was originallypublished both as a book and a chart in1989, and further editions of the chartwere published in 1993 and 1997. Thecharts provide a single scale describinggeneral language proficiency; the originalbook gave 20 further scales describingproficiency in the four skills and social,business and academic/studyapplications. The aim was to provide a framework on to which the principalEFL/ESOL examinations could bemapped. The examinations providersrepresented formed themselves into theAssociation of British ESOL ExaminingBoards (ABEEB) in 1989.
Although authorised translations of theESU Framework have been published and the scale has been widely distributed,it is not strictly in the public domain asonly members of ABEEB may align theirexaminations with its levels. For thisreason, it was not included in the maps in this report.
24 SECTION 2 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SCALES: THE SPECTRUM OF LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
3.1Demonstrating how skillsand levels alignRather than a single map showing thealignment of the various scales, a series of maps has been produced illustratingdifferent language layers and skills. In part, this reflects the methodology of theresearch. More importantly, it is believedthat different users will find the detailed
alignment of descriptors of differentaspects of language useful. The alignmentof the levels of the scales to those of the national qualifications framework isconsistent throughout all the maps and all modes of language use:
25
Section 3Maps illustrating the alignment of scales and levels
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
NQF levelMap 1overall
alignment
Map 2overall
proficiency
Map 3Listening
Skills
Map 4Speaking
Skills
Map 5Reading
Skills
Map 6WritingSkills
Level 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Level 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Level 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Level 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Level 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Entry 3 Entry 3 Entry 3 Entry 3 Entry 3 Entry 3 Entry 3
Entry 2 Entry 2 Entry 2 Entry 2 Entry 2 Entry 2 Entry 2
Entry 1 Entry 1 Entry 1 Entry 1 Entry 1 Entry 1 Entry 1
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
The six maps included here are as follows:
Map 1: Overall alignment of languageproficiency scales
This provides an overview of the alignmentto the national qualifications framework ofthe five general language proficiencyscales under consideration:
The national standards for adult literacy
Key Skills CommunicationSpecifications
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
The National Language Standards
A language in common
Map 2: General language proficiency
This map aligns the descriptors of generallanguage proficiency from the four mainscales under consideration [the first fourfrom the list above] to the nationalqualifications framework from Entry 1 to Level 5.
The same principles of organisation asused in Map 2 are applied in Maps 3 to 6.Here the four scales, arranged to makethree overall scales by combining KeySkills and the adult literacy standards, arealigned to each other and to the NQF interms of the detailed skills associated witheach language mode
Map 3: Listening Skills
Map 4: Speaking Skills
Map 5: Reading Skills
Map 6: Writing Skills
3.2General principlesThe maps show the alignment of thevarious language proficiency scales. As detailed in section 1.3, this alignment is based solely on a scrutiny of thedescriptors used in the scales to defineproficiency levels. No external reference to examinations or qualifications offered by awarding bodies was made. Thesubsequent location of ESOL qualificationson the levels of the NQF for purposes ofaccreditation was carried out separately, at a later date, by QCA.
The maps align existing scales designedand constructed by different organisationsfor different educational sectors. They do not introduce any new scales ordescriptors, and do not attempt toconstruct an ‘anchor’ scale to which allother scales could be related. Given theinternational nature of languages and the international currency of languagequalifications, any attempt to constructsuch an ‘anchor’ scale was consideredbeyond the scope of this investigation.Moreover it was judged that the compositescales presented here should serve such a purpose.
26 SECTION 3 MAPS ILLUSTRATING THE ALIGNMENT OF SCALES AND LEVELS
Notes:
1 In the national qualifications framework, levels 4 and 5 represent higher-level qualifications, A levels are at level 3, GCSE grades A-C atlevel 2 and GCSE grades D-G at level 1.
2 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority,National standards for adult literacy andnumeracy, 2000: British national standardspublished as part of the adult basic skillsstrategy in order to specify the full range ofskills required for an adult to communicateconfidently, effectively and efficiently.
3 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, KeySkills Units, 2000: These specify a range of key skills, including communication, required to operate effectively at the respective levels.
4 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, Alanguage in common, 2000: National guidancerelating to performance of speakers of Englishas an Additional Language (EAL) within theschool-based UK national curriculum.
5 Council of Europe, Common EuropeanFramework of Reference for Languages,Cambridge University Press, 2001: Descriptionsof six levels of foreign language proficiencyoffered as international standards.
6 Languages National Training Organisation, The National Language Standards, 2000:British national standards for the vocational use of foreign languages (including English as a Foreign Language).
7 There are no qualifications at pre-entry level;however the Pre-entry Curriculum Frameworkfor literacy and numeracy provides clearmilestones to enable learners to progresstowards Entry 1, accreditation at pre-entry level is available if appropriate to the learner.
3.3What the maps showThe maps enable users to see thealignment of the levels of various scalesunder consideration. Users who areinterested in particular aspects or skills of language can consult the appropriatemaps to determine comparisons and
equivalences. In order to provide detailand transparency, the maps quote thedescriptors used in the scales and, at the foot of the columns, provide pagereferences for these quotations.
27 28
MAP 1: General language proficiency scales
Nationalqualificationsframework 1
National standards for adult literacy 2
Key Skills 3 National curriculum 4
Level 5 (Level 5)
8
Nationalcurriculum levels
2
(C2.2)
Level 5
Level 4 Level 4
Level 3 Level 3 C2 Mastery
Level 4Level 2Level 2 Level 2C1 Operational
Proficiency
Level 3Level 1Level 1 Level 1 B2 Vantage
Level 2Entry level 3
Entry level 2
Entry level 1
Entry level
Level 1Secure/Threshold
B1 Threshold
Level 1A2 Waystage
(Entry)A1 Breakthrough
Pre-entry 7
EAL Step 2
EAL Step 1
Council of Europe
Framework 5
National Language
Standards 6
QCA
.
Leve
l 1A
n ad
ult
can:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d to
spo
ken
lang
uage
, in
clud
ing
info
rmat
ion
and
narr
ativ
es,
and
follo
w e
xpla
natio
ns a
nd
inst
ruct
ions
of v
aryi
ng le
ngth
s, a
dapt
ing
resp
onse
to
spea
ker,
med
ium
and
con
text
.
spea
k to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n, id
eas
and
opin
ions
,ad
aptin
g sp
eech
and
con
tent
to
take
acc
ount
of t
he
liste
ner(s
) and
med
ium
.
enga
ge in
dis
cuss
ion
with
one
or
mor
e pe
ople
in
fam
iliar
and
unfa
milia
r si
tuat
ions
, m
akin
g cl
ear
and
rele
vant
con
trib
utio
ns t
hat
resp
ond
to w
hat
othe
rs s
ay
and
prod
uce
a sh
ared
und
erst
andi
ng a
bout
diff
eren
t to
pics
.
read
and
und
erst
and
stra
ight
forw
ard
text
s of
var
ying
le
ngth
on
a va
riety
of t
opic
s ac
cura
tely
and
in
depe
nden
tly.
read
and
obt
ain
info
rmat
ion
from
diff
eren
t so
urce
s.
writ
e to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n, id
eas
and
opin
ions
cl
early
usi
ng le
ngth
, fo
rmat
and
sty
le a
ppro
pria
te t
o pu
rpos
e an
d au
dien
ce.
Ent
ry 3
A
n ad
ult
can:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d to
spo
ken
lang
uage
, in
clud
ing
stra
ight
forw
ard
info
rmat
ion
and
narr
ativ
es,
and
follo
w
stra
ight
forw
ard
expl
anat
ions
and
inst
ruct
ions
, bo
th
face
-to-
face
and
on
the
tele
phon
e.
spea
k to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n, fe
elin
gs a
nd
opin
ions
on
fam
iliar
topi
cs,
usin
g ap
prop
riate
form
ality
, bo
th fa
ce-t
o-fa
ce a
nd o
n th
e te
leph
one.
enga
ge in
dis
cuss
ion
with
one
or
mor
e pe
ople
in
a fa
milia
r si
tuat
ion,
mak
ing
rele
vant
poi
nts
and
resp
ondi
ng t
o w
hat
othe
rs s
ay t
o re
ach
a sh
ared
un
ders
tand
ing
abou
t fa
milia
r to
pics
.
read
and
und
erst
and
shor
t, s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d te
xts
on
fam
iliar
topi
cs a
ccur
atel
y an
d in
depe
nden
tly.
read
and
obt
ain
info
rmat
ion
from
eve
ryda
y so
urce
s.
writ
e to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n an
d op
inio
ns w
ith
som
e ad
apta
tion
to t
he in
tend
ed a
udie
nce.
B2
Vant
age
The
lang
uage
use
r ca
n:
unde
rsta
nd t
he m
ain
idea
s of
com
plex
tex
ts o
n bo
th c
oncr
ete
and
abst
ract
top
ics,
incl
udin
g te
chni
cal d
iscu
ssio
ns in
his
/her
fiel
d of
sp
ecia
lisat
ion.
inte
ract
with
a d
egre
e of
flue
ncy
and
spon
tane
ity
that
mak
es r
egul
ar in
tera
ctio
n w
ith n
ativ
e sp
eake
rs
quite
pos
sibl
e w
ithou
t st
rain
for
eith
er p
art.
prod
uce
clea
r, de
taile
d te
xt o
n a
wid
e ra
nge
of
subj
ects
and
exp
lain
a v
iew
poin
t on
a t
opic
al
issu
e gi
ving
the
adv
anta
ges
and
disa
dvan
tage
s of
var
ious
opt
ions
.
B1
The
sho
ldTh
e la
ngua
ge u
ser
can:
unde
rsta
nd t
he m
ain
poin
ts o
f cle
ar s
tand
ard
inpu
t on
fam
iliar
mat
ters
reg
ular
ly e
ncou
nter
ed in
wor
k,
scho
ol,
leis
ure,
etc
.
deal
with
mos
t si
tuat
ions
like
ly t
o ar
ise
whi
le
trav
ellin
g in
an
area
whe
re t
he la
ngua
ge is
spo
ken.
prod
uce
sim
ple
conn
ecte
d te
xt o
n to
pics
whi
ch
are
fam
iliar
or o
f per
sona
l int
eres
t.
desc
ribe
expe
rienc
es a
nd e
vent
s, d
ream
s, h
opes
an
d am
bitio
ns a
nd b
riefly
giv
e re
ason
s an
d ex
plan
atio
ns fo
r op
inio
ns a
nd p
lans
.
Leve
l 3Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
is c
ompe
tent
in a
var
ied
rang
e of
lang
uage
tas
ks,
both
fact
ual a
nd e
xpre
ssiv
e, p
erfo
rmed
in a
var
iety
of
con
text
s.
has
a re
pert
oire
whi
ch is
wid
e an
d ad
apta
ble
to
the
unex
pect
ed a
nd g
rasp
of t
he g
ram
mat
ical
sy
stem
is m
ainl
y se
cure
.
Leve
l 2Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
is c
ompe
tent
in a
lim
ited
rang
e of
tas
ks,
perf
orm
ed
in fa
milia
r w
ork
and
soci
al c
onte
xts.
has
a re
pert
oire
equ
al t
o m
ost
rout
ine
lang
uage
ta
sks
and
the
user
has
suf
ficie
nt g
rasp
of g
ram
mar
to
cop
e w
ith s
ome
non-
rout
ine
task
s.
MAP 2: General language proficiency
29
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 4
At
this
leve
l an
adul
t ca
n:
deve
lop
a st
rate
gy fo
r us
ing
com
mun
icat
ion
skills
ove
r an
ext
ende
d pe
riod
of t
ime.
take
the
lead
rol
e in
a g
roup
dis
cuss
ion
abou
t a
com
plex
sub
ject
.
writ
e ex
tend
ed d
ocum
ents
abo
ut c
ompl
ex s
ubje
cts.
eval
uate
you
r ov
eral
l str
ateg
y an
d pr
esen
t th
e ou
tcom
es fr
om y
our
wor
k.
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 3
At
this
leve
l an
adul
t ca
n:
cont
ribut
e to
a g
roup
dis
cuss
ion
abou
t a
com
plex
su
bjec
t.
mak
e a
pres
enta
tion
abou
t a
com
plex
sub
ject
.
read
and
syn
thes
ise
info
rmat
ion
from
ext
ende
d do
cum
ents
abo
ut a
com
plex
sub
ject
.
writ
e di
ffere
nt t
ypes
of d
ocum
ents
abo
ut c
ompl
ex
subj
ects
.
Leve
l 2A
n ad
ult
can:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d to
spo
ken
lang
uage
, in
clud
ing
exte
nded
info
rmat
ion
and
narr
ativ
es,
and
follo
w
deta
iled
expl
anat
ions
and
mul
ti-st
ep in
stru
ctio
ns o
f va
ryin
g le
ngth
, ad
aptin
g re
spon
se t
o sp
eake
r, m
ediu
m
and
cont
ext.
spea
k to
com
mun
icat
e st
raig
htfo
rwar
d an
d de
taile
d in
form
atio
n, id
eas
and
opin
ions
cle
arly,
ada
ptin
g sp
eech
and
con
tent
to
take
acc
ount
of t
he li
sten
er(s
), m
ediu
m,
purp
ose
and
situ
atio
n.
enga
ge in
dis
cuss
ion
with
one
or
mor
e pe
ople
in a
va
riety
of d
iffer
ent
situ
atio
ns,
mak
ing
clea
r an
d ef
fect
ive
cont
ribut
ions
tha
t pr
oduc
e ou
tcom
es a
ppro
pria
te t
o pu
rpos
e an
d to
pic.
read
and
und
erst
and
a ra
nge
of t
exts
of v
aryi
ng
com
plex
ity,
accu
rate
ly a
nd in
depe
nden
tly.
read
and
obt
ain
info
rmat
ion
of v
aryi
ng le
ngth
and
det
ail
from
diff
eren
t so
urce
s.
writ
e co
mm
unic
ate
info
rmat
ion,
idea
s an
d op
inio
ns
clea
rly a
nd e
ffect
ivel
y, u
sing
leng
th,
form
at a
nd s
tyle
ap
prop
riate
to
purp
ose,
con
tent
and
aud
ienc
e.
C2
Mas
tery
The
lang
uage
use
r ca
n:
unde
rsta
nd w
ith e
ase
virt
ually
eve
ryth
ing
hear
d or
rea
d.
sum
mar
ise
info
rmat
ion
from
diff
eren
t sp
oken
and
w
ritte
n so
urce
s, r
econ
stru
ctin
g ar
gum
ents
and
ac
coun
ts in
a c
oher
ent
pres
enta
tion.
expr
ess
him
/her
self
spon
tane
ousl
y, v
ery
fluen
tly
and
prec
isel
y, d
iffer
entia
ting
finer
sha
des
of
mea
ning
eve
n in
mor
e co
mpl
ex s
ituat
ions
.
[Mas
tery
is n
ot in
tend
ed t
o im
ply
nativ
e or
ne
ar-n
ativ
e co
mpe
tenc
e].
C1
Op
erat
iona
l Pro
ficie
ncy
The
lang
uage
use
r ca
n:
unde
rsta
nd a
wid
e ra
nge
of d
eman
ding
, lo
nger
te
xts
and
reco
gnis
e im
plic
it m
eani
ng.
expr
ess
him
/her
self
fluen
tly a
nd s
pont
aneo
usly
w
ithou
t m
uch
obvi
ous
sear
chin
g fo
r ex
pres
sion
s.
use
lang
uage
flex
ibly
and
effe
ctiv
ely
for
soci
al,
acad
emic
and
pro
fess
iona
l pur
pose
s.
prod
uce
clea
r, w
ell-s
truc
ture
d, d
etai
led
text
on
com
plex
sub
ject
s, s
how
ing
cont
rolle
d us
e of
or
gani
satio
nal p
atte
rns,
con
nect
ors
and
cohe
sive
de
vice
s.
Leve
l 5Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
is a
ccep
ted
soc
ially
as
nativ
e or
nea
r na
tive
spea
ker.
is c
ompe
tent
in t
he fu
ll ra
nge
of c
ompl
ex la
ngua
ge
task
s ac
ross
a w
ide
and
ofte
n un
pred
icta
ble
varie
ty
of c
onte
xts.
has
a co
mm
and
of id
iom
and
gra
mm
atic
al
stru
ctur
es w
hich
per
mits
exp
ress
ion
of t
he fi
nest
nu
ance
s.
appl
ies
a si
gnifi
cant
ran
ge o
f lan
guag
e st
rate
gies
fro
m a
n ex
tens
ive
repe
rtoi
re, c
ontin
uous
lyup
date
d to
mee
t ch
angi
ng r
equi
rem
ents
.
has
inte
ract
ive
skills
whi
ch a
llow
com
plet
e an
d ha
rmon
ious
con
trol
of a
ny d
iscu
ssio
n an
d co
nsta
nt
revi
ew o
f its
con
tent
and
dire
ctio
n.
Leve
l 4Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
is c
ompe
tent
in a
bro
ad r
ange
of c
ompl
ex la
ngua
geta
sks
in t
he u
ser’s
spe
cial
ist
area
, pe
rfor
med
in a
w
ide
varie
ty o
f con
text
s in
whi
ch fl
exib
ility
of
lingu
istic
ada
ptat
ion
is e
ssen
tial.
has
fluen
cy in
terr
upte
d on
ly b
y th
e m
ost
conc
eptu
ally
diff
icul
t to
pics
and
the
use
r ca
n in
tera
ct s
kilfu
lly in
dis
cuss
ion,
con
trib
utin
g to
and
he
lpin
g to
mai
ntai
n co
here
nce.
30 SECTION 3 MAPS ILLUSTRATING THE ALIGNMENT OF SCALES AND LEVELS
MAP 2: General language proficiency (continued)
31 32
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Ent
ry 2
An
adul
t ca
n:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d to
spo
ken
lang
uage
, in
clud
ing
stra
ight
forw
ard
info
rmat
ion,
sho
rt n
arra
tives
, ex
plan
atio
ns a
nd in
stru
ctio
ns.
spea
k to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n, fe
elin
gs a
nd
opin
ions
on
fam
iliar
topi
cs.
enga
ge in
dis
cuss
ion
with
one
or
mor
e pe
ople
in a
fa
milia
r si
tuat
ion
to e
stab
lish
shar
ed u
nder
stan
ding
ab
out
fam
iliar
topi
cs.
read
and
und
erst
and
shor
t st
raig
htfo
rwar
d te
xts
on
fam
iliar
topi
cs.
read
and
obt
ain
info
rmat
ion
from
sho
rt d
ocum
ents
, fa
milia
r so
urce
s an
d si
gns
and
sym
bols
.
writ
e to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n w
ith s
ome
awar
enes
s of
the
inte
nded
aud
ienc
e.
Ent
ry 1
An
adul
t ca
n:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d to
spo
ken
lang
uage
, in
clud
ing
sim
ple
narr
ativ
es,
stat
emen
ts,
ques
tions
and
si
ngle
-ste
p in
stru
ctio
ns.
spea
k to
com
mun
icat
e ba
sic
info
rmat
ion,
feel
ings
, an
d op
inio
ns o
n fa
milia
r to
pics
.
enga
ge in
dis
cuss
ion
with
ano
ther
per
son
in a
fam
iliar
situ
atio
n ab
out
fam
iliar
topi
cs.
read
and
und
erst
and
shor
t te
xts
with
rep
eate
d la
ngua
ge p
atte
rns
on fa
milia
r to
pics
.
read
and
obt
ain
info
rmat
ion
from
com
mon
sig
ns a
nd
sym
bols
.
writ
e to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n to
an
inte
nded
au
dien
ce.
So
urce
s:
QC
A,
Key
Ski
lls U
nits
3 a
nd 4
,20
00
QC
A,
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
y an
d
num
erac
y, 2
000
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e,
Com
mon
Eur
opea
n Fr
amew
ork,
200
1: p
.24,
36
Lang
uage
s N
atio
nal T
rain
ing
Org
anis
atio
n,
The
Nat
iona
l Lan
guag
e S
tand
ard
s, 2
000:
p.2
3
A2
Way
stag
eTh
e la
ngua
ge u
ser
can:
unde
rsta
nd s
ente
nces
and
freq
uent
ly u
sed
expr
essi
ons
rela
ted
to a
reas
of m
ost
imm
edia
te
rele
vanc
e (e
.g.
very
bas
ic p
erso
nal a
nd fa
mily
in
form
atio
n, s
hopp
ing,
loca
l geo
grap
hy,
empl
oym
ent).
com
mun
icat
e in
sim
ple
and
rout
ine
task
s re
quiri
ng
a si
mpl
e an
d di
rect
exc
hang
e of
info
rmat
ion
on
fam
iliar
and
rout
ine
mat
ters
.
desc
ribe
in s
impl
e te
rms
aspe
cts
of h
is/h
er
back
grou
nd,
imm
edia
te e
nviro
nmen
t an
d m
atte
rs
in a
reas
of i
mm
edia
te n
eed.
A1
Bre
akth
roug
hTh
e la
ngua
ge u
ser
can:
unde
rsta
nd a
nd u
se fa
milia
r ev
eryd
ay e
xpre
ssio
ns
and
very
bas
ic p
hras
es a
imed
at
the
satis
fact
ion
of
need
s of
a c
oncr
ete
type
.
intr
oduc
e hi
m/h
erse
lf an
d ot
hers
and
can
ask
and
an
swer
que
stio
ns a
bout
per
sona
l det
ails
suc
h as
w
here
he/
she
lives
, pe
ople
he/
she
know
s an
d th
ings
he/
she
has.
inte
ract
in a
sim
ple
way
pro
vide
d th
e ot
her
pers
on
talk
s sl
owly
and
cle
arly
and
is p
repa
red
to h
elp.
Leve
l 1Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
is c
ompe
tent
in a
lim
ited
rang
e of
pre
dict
able
an
d si
mpl
e la
ngua
ge t
asks
, us
ing
mai
nly
set
expr
essi
ons
and
sim
ple
com
bina
tion
of t
hese
.
is c
apab
le o
f som
e re
hear
sed
gram
mat
ical
m
anip
ulat
ions
.
Leve
l 3 a
nd 4
of t
he K
ey S
kills
spe
cific
atio
n al
so p
rovi
ded
the
basi
s fo
r th
e de
velo
pmen
t of
the
Sub
ject
Spe
cific
atio
nsfo
r te
ache
rs o
f adu
lt lit
erac
y an
d nu
mer
acy,
DfE
S/F
EN
TO20
01,
whi
ch s
et o
ut t
he s
kills
, kn
owle
dge
and
unde
rsta
ndin
gfo
r sp
eaki
ng,
liste
ning
, re
adin
g an
d w
ritin
g at
leve
ls 3
and
4.
See
als
o th
e ‘C
omm
unic
atio
n in
fore
ign
lang
uage
s’se
ctio
n of
the
Eur
opea
n C
omm
issi
on’s
Con
cep
td
ocum
ent
of t
he C
omm
issi
on e
xper
t gr
oup
on
‘Key
Com
pet
enci
es’,
Mar
ch 2
002.
33
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 4
An
adul
t ca
n:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d pe
rcep
tivel
y to
oth
ers.
eval
uate
info
rmat
ion
obta
ined
from
di
scus
sion
s w
ith o
ther
s, id
entif
ying
opi
nion
, po
ssib
le b
ias
and
dist
ortio
n of
info
rmat
ion
whe
n m
akin
g ju
dgem
ents
.
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
liste
n an
d re
spon
d se
nsiti
vely
to
othe
rs.
Leve
l 2A
n ad
ult
can:
liste
n fo
r an
d id
entif
y re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n fro
m e
xten
ded
expl
anat
ions
or
pres
enta
tions
on
a ra
nge
of t
opic
s.
liste
n to
, un
ders
tand
and
follo
w le
ngth
y or
m
ulti-
step
inst
ruct
ions
and
nar
rativ
es o
n a
rang
e of
top
ics
and
in a
ran
ge o
f con
text
s in
a w
ide
rang
e of
form
al a
nd s
ocia
l ex
chan
ges.
C2
Mas
tery
The
liste
ner:
has
no d
iffic
ulty
in u
nder
stan
ding
any
kin
d of
spo
ken
lang
uage
, w
heth
er li
ve o
r br
oadc
ast,
del
iver
ed a
t fa
st
nativ
e sp
eed.
can
follo
w s
peci
alis
ed le
ctur
es a
nd p
rese
ntat
ions
em
ploy
ing
a hi
gh d
egre
e of
col
loqu
ialis
m,
regi
onal
us
age
or u
nfam
iliar
term
inol
ogy.
C1
Op
erat
iona
l Pro
ficie
ncy
The
liste
ner
can:
unde
rsta
nd e
noug
h to
follo
w e
xten
ded
spee
ch o
n ab
stra
ct a
nd c
ompl
ex t
opic
s be
yond
his
/her
ow
n fil
ed,
thou
gh s
he m
ay n
eed
to c
onfir
m o
ccas
iona
l det
ails
, es
peci
ally
if t
he a
ccen
t is
unf
amilia
r.
reco
gnis
e a
wid
e ra
nge
of id
iom
atic
exp
ress
ions
and
co
lloqu
ialis
ms,
app
reci
atin
g re
gist
er s
hifts
.
follo
w e
xten
ded
spee
ch e
ven
whe
n it
is n
ot c
lear
ly
stru
ctur
ed a
nd w
hen
rela
tions
hips
are
onl
y im
plie
d an
d no
t si
gnal
led
expl
icitl
y.
follo
w m
ost
lect
ures
, di
scus
sion
s an
d de
bate
s w
ith
rela
tive
ease
.
extr
act
info
rmat
ion
from
poo
r qu
ality
, au
dibl
y di
stor
ted
publ
ic a
nnou
ncem
ents
,eg
in a
sta
tion,
spo
rts
stad
ium
.
unde
rsta
nd c
ompl
ex t
echn
ical
info
rmat
ion,
suc
h as
op
erat
ing
inst
ruct
ions
, sp
ecifi
catio
ns fo
r fa
milia
r pr
oduc
ts a
nd s
ervi
ces.
Leve
l 5Th
e lis
tene
r ca
n ef
fect
ivel
y:
unde
rsta
nd a
ny k
ind
of s
peec
h, w
heth
er li
ve o
r re
cord
ed,
at n
orm
al o
r fa
ster
tha
n no
rmal
spe
ed,
on b
oth
fam
iliar
or
unfa
milia
r to
pics
with
litt
le d
iffic
ulty
.
obta
in in
form
atio
n fro
m c
ompl
ex a
nd s
peci
alis
ed la
ngua
ge.
extr
act
fact
s an
d da
ta fr
om c
ompl
ex a
nd s
peci
alis
ed
lang
uage
.
abst
ract
idea
s an
d th
eorie
s fro
m c
ompl
ex a
nd s
peci
alis
ed
lang
uage
.
iden
tify
the
eval
uativ
e co
nten
t of
com
plex
and
spe
cial
ised
la
ngua
ge.
Leve
l 4Th
e lis
tene
r ca
n ef
fect
ivel
y:
obta
in in
form
atio
n ab
out
com
plex
wor
k ta
sks.
liste
n to
lang
uage
var
ying
in c
ompl
exity
and
tec
hnic
ality
to
iden
tify
wor
k-re
late
d re
quire
men
ts.
liste
n to
lang
uage
var
ying
in c
ompl
exity
to
iden
tify
othe
rs’
opin
ions
and
val
ues.
extr
act
com
plex
info
rmat
ion
from
a w
ide
rang
e of
spo
ken
sour
ces
and
cope
with
eve
ryda
y la
ngua
ge,
live
or r
ecor
ded,
on b
oth
fam
iliar
and
unfa
milia
r to
pics
.
follo
w le
ctur
es,
disc
ussi
ons
and
deba
tes
with
rel
ativ
e ea
se,
extr
actin
g bo
th in
form
atio
n an
d ar
gum
ents
as
wel
l as
iden
tifyi
ng t
he a
ppar
ent
attit
udes
and
em
otio
ns o
f the
sp
eake
rs.
hand
le a
ran
ge o
f fam
iliar
acce
nts
and
collo
quia
lism
s.
Leve
l 1A
n ad
ult
can:
liste
n to
spo
ken
lang
uage
, in
clud
ing
info
rmat
ion
and
narr
ativ
es,
of v
aryi
ng
leng
th.
liste
n fo
r an
d id
entif
y re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n fro
m e
xpla
natio
ns a
nd p
rese
ntat
ions
on
a ra
nge
of s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d to
pics
.
liste
n fo
r an
d un
ders
tand
exp
lana
tions
, in
stru
ctio
ns a
nd n
arra
tives
on
diffe
rent
to
pics
in a
ran
ge o
f con
text
s.
prov
ide
feed
back
and
con
firm
atio
n w
hen
liste
ning
to
othe
rs.
follo
w a
nd c
ontr
ibut
e to
dis
cuss
ions
on
a ra
nge
of s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d to
pics
.
in fo
rmal
exc
hang
es c
onne
cted
with
educ
atio
n, t
rain
ing,
wor
k an
d so
cial
rol
es.
B2
Vant
age
The
liste
ner
can:
unde
rsta
nd s
tand
ard
spok
en la
ngua
ge,
live
or
broa
dcas
t, o
n bo
th fa
milia
r an
d un
fam
iliar
topi
cs
norm
ally
enc
ount
ered
in p
erso
nal,
soci
al,
acad
emic
or
voc
atio
nal l
ife.
Onl
y ex
trem
e ba
ckgr
ound
noi
se,
inad
equa
te d
isco
urse
str
uctu
re a
nd/o
r id
iom
atic
usa
ge
influ
ence
s th
e ab
ility
to u
nder
stan
d.
unde
rsta
nd t
he m
ain
idea
s of
pro
posi
tiona
lly a
nd
lingu
istic
ally
com
plex
spe
ech
on b
oth
conc
rete
and
ab
stra
ct t
opic
s de
liver
ed in
a s
tand
ard
dial
ect,
incl
udin
gte
chni
cal d
iscu
ssio
ns in
his
/her
fiel
d of
spe
cial
isat
ion.
follo
w e
xten
ded
spee
ch a
nd c
ompl
ex li
nes
of a
rgum
ent
prov
ided
the
top
ic is
rea
sona
bly
fam
iliar
and
the
dire
ctio
n of
tal
k is
sig
n-po
sted
by
expl
icit
mar
kers
.
follo
w t
he e
ssen
tials
of l
ectu
res,
tal
ks a
nd r
epor
ts a
nd
othe
r fo
rms
of a
cade
mic
/pro
fess
iona
l pre
sent
atio
n w
hich
are
pro
posi
tiona
lly a
nd li
ngui
stic
ally
com
plex
.
unde
rsta
nd a
nnou
ncem
ents
and
mes
sage
s on
co
ncre
te a
nd a
bstr
act
topi
cs s
poke
n in
sta
ndar
d di
alec
t at
nor
mal
spe
ed.
unde
rsta
nd m
ost
TV n
ews
and
curr
ent
affa
irs
prog
ram
mes
.
unde
rsta
nd d
ocum
enta
ries,
live
inte
rvie
ws,
tal
k sh
ows,
pl
ays
and
the
maj
ority
of f
ilms
in s
tand
ard
dial
ect.
Leve
l 3Th
e lis
tene
r ca
n ef
fect
ivel
y:
obta
in in
form
atio
n ab
out
varie
d w
ork
task
s.
extr
act
spec
ific
deta
ils fr
om a
var
iety
of s
ourc
es.
iden
tify
info
rmat
ion,
idea
s an
d op
inio
ns fr
om a
var
iety
of
sou
rces
.
unde
rsta
nd m
ost
ever
yday
spo
ken
lang
uage
cov
erin
g bo
th
fam
iliar
and
less
fam
iliar
mat
eria
l, in
clud
ing
spec
ific
deta
ils
from
, an
d th
e ge
nera
l mea
ning
of,
a ra
nge
of c
onve
rsat
ions
,an
noun
cem
ents
, m
essa
ges,
inst
ruct
ions
and
dire
ctio
ns,
incl
udin
g ex
tend
ed b
road
cast
and
rec
orde
d m
ater
ial
spok
en a
t a
norm
al s
peed
.
MAP 3: Listening scales
34 SECTION 3 MAPS ILLUSTRATING THE ALIGNMENT OF SCALES AND LEVELS
35
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Ent
ry 2
An
adul
t ca
n:
unde
rsta
nd t
he m
ain
poin
ts o
n th
e lo
cal
and
natio
nal n
ews
on t
elev
isio
n an
d ra
dio.
liste
n fo
r an
d fo
llow
the
gis
t of
exp
lana
tions
,in
stru
ctio
ns a
nd n
arra
tives
.
liste
n fo
r de
tail
in s
hort
exp
lana
tions
, in
stru
ctio
ns a
nd n
arra
tives
.
liste
n fo
r an
d id
entif
y th
e m
ain
poin
ts o
f sh
ort
expl
anat
ions
or
pres
enta
tions
.
liste
n to
and
follo
w s
hort
, st
raig
htfo
rwar
d ex
plan
atio
ns a
nd in
stru
ctio
ns.
liste
n to
and
iden
tify
sim
ply
expr
esse
d fe
elin
gs a
nd o
pini
ons.
follo
w t
he g
ist
of d
iscu
ssio
ns.
follo
w t
he m
ain
poin
ts o
f a d
iscu
ssio
n.
in s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d fo
rmal
exc
hang
esco
nnec
ted
with
edu
catio
n, t
rain
ing,
wor
k an
dso
cial
rol
es.
A2
Way
stag
eTh
e lis
tene
r ca
n:
unde
rsta
nd e
noug
h to
be
able
to
mee
t ne
eds
of a
co
ncre
te t
ype
prov
ided
spe
ech
is c
lear
ly a
nd s
low
ly
artic
ulat
ed.
unde
rsta
nd p
hras
es a
nd e
xpre
ssio
ns r
elat
ed t
o ar
eas
of m
ost
imm
edia
te p
riorit
y (e
.g.
very
bas
ic p
erso
nal
and
fam
ily in
form
atio
n, s
hopp
ing,
loca
l geo
grap
hy,
empl
oym
ent)
prov
ided
spe
ech
is c
lear
ly a
nd s
low
ly
artic
ulat
ed.
catc
h th
e m
ain
poin
t in
sho
rt,
clea
r, si
mpl
e m
essa
ges
and
anno
unce
men
ts.
unde
rsta
nd s
impl
e di
rect
ions
rel
atin
g to
how
to
get
from
X t
o Y,
by
foot
or
publ
ic t
rans
port
.
iden
tify
the
mai
n po
int
of T
V n
ews
item
s re
port
ing
even
ts,
acci
dent
s, e
tc.
whe
re t
he v
isua
l sup
port
s th
e co
mm
enta
ry.
follo
w c
hang
es o
f top
ic o
f fac
tual
TV
new
s ite
ms,
an
d fo
rm a
n id
ea o
f the
mai
n co
nten
t.
Leve
l 1Th
e lis
tene
r ca
n ef
fect
ivel
y:
obta
in in
form
atio
n ab
out
pred
icta
ble
and
sim
ple
lang
uage
ta
sks.
liste
n fo
r ea
sily
rec
ogni
sabl
e da
ta a
nd fa
cts.
liste
n fo
r ea
sily
rec
ogni
sabl
e in
form
atio
n fo
r ac
tion.
unde
rsta
nd s
impl
e ev
eryd
ay s
poke
n la
ngua
ge.
obta
in s
peci
fic d
etai
ls fr
om a
nnou
ncem
ents
and
mes
sage
s sp
oken
cle
arly
at
delib
erat
e sp
eed,
with
litt
le o
r no
sou
nd
inte
rfer
ence
.
follo
w s
impl
e in
stru
ctio
ns a
nd d
irect
ions
unde
rsta
nd t
he g
ist
of s
impl
e co
nver
satio
ns o
n fa
milia
r m
atte
rs.
follo
w b
rief a
nd fi
rst-
cont
act
enco
unte
rs,
eg r
ecep
tion
and
reta
il tr
ansa
ctio
ns.
Ent
ry 1
An
adul
t ca
n:
liste
n fo
r re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n in
a p
ublic
an
noun
cem
ent
at a
sta
tion,
eg
pla
tform
nu
mb
er.
follo
w a
n in
stru
ctio
n fro
m a
sup
ervi
sor.
follo
w v
erba
l ins
truc
tions
mad
e to
a g
roup
, eg
in a
kee
p-f
it cl
ass.
liste
n fo
r th
e gi
st o
f sho
rt e
xpla
natio
ns
liste
n fo
r de
tail
usin
g ke
y w
ords
to
extr
act
som
e sp
ecifi
c in
form
atio
n.
follo
w s
ingl
e-st
ep in
stru
ctio
ns in
a fa
milia
r co
ntex
t.
liste
n to
req
uest
s fo
r pe
rson
al in
form
atio
n.
liste
n w
hen
part
icip
atin
g in
sim
ple
exch
ange
s an
d ev
eryd
ay c
onte
xts.
A1
Bre
akth
roug
hTh
e lis
tene
r ca
n:
follo
w s
peec
h w
hich
is v
ery
slow
and
car
eful
ly
artic
ulat
ed,
with
long
pau
ses
for
him
/her
to
assi
mila
te
mea
ning
.
unde
rsta
nd in
stru
ctio
ns a
ddre
ssed
car
eful
ly a
nd s
low
ly
to h
im/h
er a
nd fo
llow
sho
rt,
sim
ple
dire
ctio
ns.
unde
rsta
nd e
very
day
expr
essi
ons
aim
ed a
t th
e sa
tisfa
ctio
n of
sim
ple
need
s of
a c
oncr
ete
type
, de
liver
ed d
irect
ly t
o hi
m/h
er in
cle
ar,
slow
and
rep
eate
d sp
eech
by
a sy
mpa
thet
ic s
peak
er.
unde
rsta
nd q
uest
ions
and
inst
ruct
ions
add
ress
ed
care
fully
and
slo
wly
to
him
/her
and
follo
w s
hort
, si
mpl
e di
rect
ions
.
So
urce
s:
QC
A,
Key
Ski
lls U
nits
3 a
nd 4
, 20
00
QC
A,
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
y an
d n
umer
acy,
200
0
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e,
Com
mon
Eur
opea
n Fr
amew
ork,
200
1:
p.66
+ 6
7, 7
1, 7
5
Lang
uage
s N
atio
nal T
rain
ing
Org
anis
atio
n, T
he N
atio
nal
Lang
uage
Sta
ndar
ds,
200
0: p
.27,
31
& 3
2, 3
5, 3
9, 4
3
Ent
ry 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
liste
n to
and
follo
w t
he g
ist
of e
xpla
natio
ns,
inst
ruct
ions
and
nar
rativ
es in
diff
eren
t co
ntex
ts.
liste
n fo
r de
tail
in e
xpla
natio
ns,
inst
ruct
ions
an
d na
rrat
ives
in d
iffer
ent
cont
exts
.
liste
n fo
r an
d id
entif
y re
leva
nt in
form
atio
n an
d ne
w in
form
atio
n fro
m d
iscu
ssio
ns,
expl
anat
ions
and
pre
sent
atio
ns.
liste
n to
and
res
pond
app
ropr
iate
ly t
o ot
her
poin
ts o
f vie
w.
in fa
milia
r fo
rmal
exc
hang
es c
onne
cted
with
educ
atio
n, t
rain
ing,
wor
k an
d so
cial
rol
es.
B1
The
sho
ldTh
e lis
tene
r ca
n:
unde
rsta
nd s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d fa
ctua
l inf
orm
atio
n ab
out
com
mon
eve
ryda
y or
job-
rela
ted
topi
cs,
iden
tifyi
ng b
oth
gene
ral m
essa
ges
and
spec
ific
deta
ils,
prov
ided
spe
ech
is c
lear
ly a
rtic
ulat
ed in
a g
ener
ally
fam
iliar
acce
nt.
unde
rsta
nd t
he m
ain
poin
ts o
f cle
ar s
tand
ard
spee
ch
on fa
milia
r m
atte
rs r
egul
arly
enc
ount
ered
in w
ork,
sc
hool
, le
isur
e, e
tc.,
incl
udin
g sh
ort
narr
ativ
es.
follo
w a
lect
ure
or t
alk
with
in h
is/h
er o
wn
field
, pr
ovid
ed
the
subj
ect
mat
ter
is fa
milia
r an
d th
e pr
esen
tatio
n st
raig
htfo
rwar
d an
d cl
early
str
uctu
red.
unde
rsta
nd s
impl
e te
chni
cal i
nfor
mat
ion,
suc
h as
op
erat
ing
inst
ruct
ions
for
ever
yday
equ
ipm
ent.
follo
w d
etai
led
dire
ctio
ns.
Leve
l 2Th
e lis
tene
r ca
n ef
fect
ivel
y:
obta
in in
form
atio
n ab
out
rout
ine
and
daily
act
iviti
es.
liste
n fo
r sp
ecifi
c de
tails
from
fam
iliar
and
dire
ctly
ac
cess
ible
sou
rces
.
liste
n fo
r ge
nera
l inf
orm
atio
n fro
m fa
milia
r an
d di
rect
ly
acce
ssib
le s
ourc
es.
unde
rsta
nd s
impl
e ev
eryd
ay s
poke
n la
ngua
ge,
incl
udin
g m
anip
ulat
ed fo
rms
of s
et e
xpre
ssio
ns w
ith s
ome
less
fa
milia
r el
emen
ts.
obta
in b
oth
spec
ific
deta
ils fr
om,
and
the
gene
ral m
eani
ng
of,
a ra
nge
of c
onve
rsat
ions
, an
noun
cem
ents
, m
essa
ges,
in
stru
ctio
ns a
nd d
irect
ions
spo
ken
at n
orm
al s
peed
.
cope
with
com
mon
sur
viva
l situ
atio
ns in
volv
ing
trav
el,
acco
mm
odat
ion
and
obta
inin
g go
ods
and
serv
ices
.
obta
in c
omm
on n
umer
ical
, so
cial
fact
s an
d si
mpl
e da
ta
from
pub
lic a
nnou
ncem
ents
and
bro
adca
sts.
36
MAP 3: Listening scales (continued)
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
0
37
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 4
An
adul
t ca
n:
take
a le
ad r
ole
in g
roup
dis
cuss
ions
, cl
early
st
ruct
urin
g w
hat
he/s
he s
ays,
and
usi
ng a
ppro
pria
te
voca
bula
ry,
into
natio
n an
d em
phas
is t
o m
ake
his/
her
poin
ts.
mak
e an
ora
l pre
sent
atio
n ab
out
com
plex
poi
nts,
or
gani
sing
and
cle
arly
pre
sent
ing
info
rmat
ion
to s
uit
purp
ose,
sub
ject
and
aud
ienc
e.
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
cont
ribut
e to
a g
roup
dis
cuss
ion
abou
t a
com
plex
su
bjec
t, m
akin
g cl
ear
and
rele
vant
con
trib
utio
ns in
a
way
tha
t su
its p
urpo
se a
nd s
ituat
ion.
crea
te o
ppor
tuni
ties
in a
dis
cuss
ion
for
othe
rs t
o co
ntrib
ute
whe
n ap
prop
riate
.
mak
e a
pres
enta
tion
abou
t a
com
plex
sub
ject
, sp
eaki
ng c
lear
ly a
nd a
dapt
ing
the
styl
e to
sui
t th
e pu
rpos
e, s
ubje
ct,
audi
ence
and
situ
atio
n.
stru
ctur
e a
pres
enta
tion
so t
hat
the
sequ
ence
of
info
rmat
ion
and
idea
s m
ay b
e ea
sily
follo
wed
.
use
a ra
nge
of t
echn
ique
s to
eng
age
the
audi
ence
, in
clud
ing
effe
ctiv
e us
e of
imag
es.
C2
Mas
tery
The
spea
ker
can:
prod
uce
clea
r, sm
ooth
ly fl
owin
g w
ell-s
truc
ture
d sp
eech
with
an
effe
ctiv
e lo
gica
l str
uctu
re w
hich
he
lps
the
reci
pien
t to
not
ice
and
rem
embe
r si
gnifi
cant
poi
nts.
hold
his
/her
ow
n in
form
al d
iscu
ssio
n of
com
plex
is
sues
, pu
ttin
g an
art
icul
ate
and
pers
uasi
ve
argu
men
t, a
t no
dis
adva
ntag
e to
nat
ive
spea
kers
.
unde
rsta
nd a
ny n
ativ
e sp
eake
r in
terlo
cuto
r, ev
en
on a
bstr
act
and
com
plex
top
ics
of a
spe
cial
ist
natu
re b
eyon
d hi
s/he
r ow
n fie
ld,
give
n an
op
port
unity
to
adju
st t
o a
non-
stan
dard
acc
ent
or d
iale
ct.
Leve
l 5Th
e sp
eake
r ca
n sp
eak
effe
ctiv
ely:
with
flu
ency
ap
pro
achi
ng t
hat
of a
nat
ive
spea
ker.
to d
eal w
ith c
ompl
ex a
nd s
peci
alis
ed t
asks
.
to e
xcha
nge
high
ly-s
peci
alis
ed in
form
atio
n an
d ad
vice
.
to p
rese
nt a
rgum
ents
and
deb
ate
pros
and
con
s.
to c
ontr
ibut
e to
mee
tings
.
to c
ontr
ibut
e to
com
plex
gro
up d
iscu
ssio
ns.
to d
eliv
er u
nscr
ipte
d pr
esen
tatio
ns.
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Leve
l 2A
n ad
ult
can:
spea
k cl
early
and
con
fiden
tly in
a w
ay w
hich
sui
ts t
he
situ
atio
n.
resp
ond
to d
etai
led
or e
xten
ded
ques
tions
on
a ra
nge
of t
opic
s.
resp
ond
to c
ritic
ism
and
crit
icis
e co
nstr
uctiv
ely.
mak
e re
ques
ts a
nd a
sk q
uest
ions
to
obta
in d
etai
led
info
rmat
ion
in fa
milia
r an
d un
fam
iliar
cont
exts
.
expr
ess
clea
rly s
tate
men
ts o
f fac
t, e
xpla
natio
ns,
inst
ruct
ions
, ac
coun
ts,
desc
riptio
ns u
sing
app
ropr
iate
st
ruct
ure,
sty
le a
nd v
ocab
ular
y.
pres
ent
info
rmat
ion
and
idea
s in
a lo
gica
l seq
uenc
e an
d pr
ovid
e fu
rthe
r de
tail
and
deve
lopm
ent
to c
larif
y or
con
firm
und
erst
andi
ng.
adap
t co
ntrib
utio
ns t
o di
scus
sion
s to
sui
t au
dien
ce,
cont
ext,
pur
pose
and
situ
atio
n.
supp
ort
opin
ions
and
arg
umen
ts w
ith e
vide
nce.
use
stra
tegi
es in
tend
ed t
o re
assu
re,
eg b
ody
lang
uage
an
d a
pp
rop
riate
phr
aseo
logy
.
in a
wid
e ra
nge
of fo
rmal
and
soc
ial e
xcha
nges
.
C1
Op
erat
iona
l Pro
ficie
ncy
The
spea
ker
can:
give
cle
ar,
deta
iled
desc
riptio
ns a
nd p
rese
ntat
ions
on
com
plex
sub
ject
s, in
tegr
atin
g su
b-th
emes
, de
velo
ping
par
ticul
ar p
oint
s an
d ro
undi
ng o
ff w
ith
an a
ppro
pria
te c
oncl
usio
n.
easi
ly k
eep
up w
ith t
he d
ebat
e, e
ven
on a
bstr
act,
co
mpl
ex,
unfa
milia
r to
pics
.
argu
e a
form
al p
ositi
on c
onvi
ncin
gly,
res
pond
ing
to q
uest
ions
and
com
men
ts a
nd a
nsw
erin
g co
mpl
ex li
nes
of c
ount
er-a
rgum
ent
fluen
tly,
spon
tane
ousl
y an
d ap
prop
riate
ly.
Leve
l 4Th
e sp
eake
r ca
n sp
eak
effe
ctiv
ely
to:
deal
with
com
plex
wor
k ta
sks.
exch
ange
info
rmat
ion
to fu
lfil c
ompl
ex w
ork
task
s.
pres
ent
and
resp
ond
to d
iffer
ent
lines
of r
easo
ning
.
Leve
l 1A
n ad
ult
can:
mak
e co
ntrib
utio
ns r
elev
ant
to t
he s
ituat
ion
and
the
subj
ect.
spea
k cl
early
in a
way
whi
ch s
uits
the
situ
atio
n.
mak
e re
ques
ts a
nd a
sk q
uest
ions
to
obta
in in
form
atio
n in
fam
iliar
and
unfa
milia
r co
ntex
ts.
resp
ond
to q
uest
ions
on
a ra
nge
of t
opic
s.
expr
ess
clea
rly s
tate
men
ts o
f fac
t, e
xpla
natio
ns,
inst
ruct
ions
, ac
coun
ts a
nd d
escr
iptio
ns.
pres
ent
info
rmat
ion
and
idea
s in
a lo
gica
l seq
uenc
e an
d in
clud
e de
tail
and
deve
lop
idea
s w
here
app
ropr
iate
.
follo
w a
nd c
ontr
ibut
e to
dis
cuss
ions
on
a ra
nge
of
stra
ight
forw
ard
topi
cs.
resp
ect
the
turn
-tak
ing
right
s of
oth
ers
durin
g di
scus
sion
s.
use
appr
opria
te p
hras
es fo
r in
terr
uptio
n.
in fo
rmal
exc
hang
es c
onne
cted
with
edu
catio
n, t
rain
ing,
wor
k an
d so
cial
rol
es.
B2
Vant
age
The
spea
ker
can:
give
cle
ar,
syst
emat
ical
ly d
evel
oped
des
crip
tions
an
d pr
esen
tatio
ns,
with
app
ropr
iate
hig
hlig
htin
g of
si
gnifi
cant
poi
nts,
and
rel
evan
t su
ppor
ting
deta
il.
give
cle
ar,
deta
iled
desc
riptio
ns a
nd p
rese
ntat
ions
on
a w
ide
rang
e of
sub
ject
s re
late
d to
his
/her
fiel
d of
inte
rest
, ex
pand
ing
and
supp
ortin
g id
eas
with
su
bsid
iary
poi
nts
and
rele
vant
exa
mpl
es.
part
icip
ate
activ
ely
in r
outin
e an
d no
n-ro
utin
e fo
rmal
dis
cuss
ion.
cont
ribut
e, a
ccou
nt fo
r an
d su
stai
n hi
s/he
r op
inio
n,
eval
uate
alte
rnat
ive
prop
osal
s an
d m
ake
and
resp
ond
to h
ypot
hese
s.
Leve
l 3Th
e sp
eake
r ca
n sp
eak
effe
ctiv
ely
to:
deal
with
var
ied
wor
k ta
sks.
ask
for
and
prov
ide
inst
ruct
ions
and
info
rmat
ion
rela
ting
to v
arie
d w
ork
task
s.
cont
ribut
e to
var
ied
wor
k-re
late
d di
scus
sion
s.
exch
ange
opi
nion
s on
var
ied
wor
k-re
late
d m
atte
rs.
give
spo
ken
pres
enta
tions
on
wor
k-re
late
d to
pics
.
sust
ain
a di
scus
sion
invo
lvin
g op
inio
ns a
nd id
eas
beyo
nd t
he m
ere
exch
ange
of f
acts
, an
d su
ppor
t hi
s/he
r vi
ews
as n
eces
sary
.
cont
ribut
e to
rou
tine
busi
ness
dis
cuss
ions
and
pr
esen
t in
form
atio
n in
form
ally
at
mee
tings
.
38 SECTION 3 MAPS ILLUSTRATING THE ALIGNMENT OF SCALES AND LEVELS
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
MAP 4: Speaking scales
40
Ent
ry 1
An
adul
t ca
n:
ask
for
inst
ruct
ions
to
be r
epea
ted
if ne
cess
ary.
resp
ond
to r
eque
sts
for
pers
onal
info
rmat
ion.
spea
k cl
early
to
be h
eard
and
und
erst
ood
in s
impl
e ex
chan
ges.
mak
e re
ques
ts u
sing
app
ropr
iate
ter
ms.
ask
ques
tions
to
obta
in s
peci
fic in
form
atio
n.
mak
e st
atem
ents
of f
act
clea
rly
spea
k in
sim
ple
exch
ange
s an
d ev
eryd
ay c
onte
xts.
in s
impl
e an
d fa
milia
r fo
rmal
exc
hang
es c
onne
cted
with
educ
atio
n, t
rain
ing,
wor
k an
d so
cial
rol
es.
A1
Bre
akth
roug
hTh
e sp
eake
r ca
n:
prod
uce
sim
ple
mai
nly
isol
ated
phr
ases
abo
ut
peop
le a
nd p
lace
s.
unde
rsta
nd q
uest
ions
and
inst
ruct
ions
add
ress
ed
care
fully
and
slo
wly
to
him
/her
and
follo
w s
hort
, si
mpl
e di
rect
ions
.
ask
peop
le fo
r th
ings
, an
d gi
ve p
eopl
e th
ings
.
ask
and
answ
er q
uest
ions
abo
ut t
hem
selv
es a
nd
othe
r pe
ople
, w
here
the
y liv
e, p
eopl
e th
ey k
now
, th
ings
the
y ha
ve.
So
urce
s:
QC
A,
Key
Ski
lls U
nits
3 a
nd 4
, 20
00
QC
A,
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
y an
d
num
erac
y, 2
000
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e,
Com
mon
Eur
opea
n Fr
amew
ork,
200
1:
p.58
+ 7
5, 7
8, 7
9, 8
1
Lang
uage
s N
atio
nal T
rain
ing
Org
anis
atio
n,
The
Nat
iona
l Lan
guag
e S
tand
ard
s, 2
000:
p.
51,
55,
60,
69,
73,
77
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Ent
ry 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
spea
k cl
early
to
be h
eard
and
und
erst
ood
usin
g ap
prop
riate
cla
rity,
spe
ed a
nd p
hras
ing.
use
form
al la
ngua
ge a
nd r
egis
ter
whe
n ap
prop
riate
.
resp
ond
to a
ran
ge o
f que
stio
ns a
bout
fam
iliar
topi
cs.
expr
ess
clea
rly s
tate
men
ts o
f fac
t an
d gi
ve s
hort
ex
plan
atio
ns,
acco
unts
and
des
crip
tions
.
mak
e re
ques
ts a
nd a
sk q
uest
ions
to
obta
in in
form
atio
n in
fam
iliar
and
unfa
milia
r co
ntex
ts.
mak
e co
ntrib
utio
ns t
o di
scus
sion
s th
at a
re r
elev
ant
to
the
subj
ect.
resp
ect
the
turn
-tak
ing
right
s of
oth
ers
durin
g di
scus
sion
s.
in fa
milia
r fo
rmal
exc
hang
es c
onne
cted
with
edu
catio
n,tr
aini
ng,
wor
k an
d so
cial
rol
es.
B1
Thr
esho
ld
The
spea
ker
can:
reas
onab
ly fl
uent
ly s
usta
in a
str
aigh
tforw
ard
desc
riptio
n of
one
of a
var
iety
of s
ubje
cts
with
in
his/
her
field
of i
nter
est,
pre
sent
ing
it as
a li
near
se
quen
ce o
f poi
nts.
take
par
t in
rou
tine
form
al d
iscu
ssio
n of
fam
iliar
subj
ects
whi
ch is
con
duct
ed in
cle
arly
art
icul
ated
sp
eech
in t
he s
tand
ard
dial
ect
and
whi
ch in
volv
es
the
exch
ange
of f
actu
al in
form
atio
n, r
ecei
ving
in
stru
ctio
ns o
r th
e di
scus
sion
of s
olut
ions
to
prac
tical
pro
blem
s.
Leve
l 2Th
e sp
eake
r ca
n sp
eak
effe
ctiv
ely
to:
deal
with
rou
tine
and
daily
act
iviti
es.
ask
for
info
rmat
ion
to c
arry
out
rou
tine
and
daily
re
quire
men
ts.
prov
ide
info
rmat
ion
to c
arry
out
rou
tine
and
daily
re
quire
men
ts.
esta
blis
h an
d m
aint
ain
spok
en c
onta
ct w
ith o
ther
s fo
r ro
utin
e pu
rpos
es.
expr
ess
spok
en o
pini
ons
on fa
milia
r an
d ro
utin
e w
ork
and
soci
al t
opic
s.
Ent
ry 2
An
adul
t ca
n:
spea
k cl
early
to
be h
eard
and
und
erst
ood
in
stra
ight
forw
ard
exch
ange
s.
mak
e re
ques
ts a
nd a
sk q
uest
ions
to
obta
in in
form
atio
n in
eve
ryda
y co
ntex
ts.
resp
ond
to s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d qu
estio
ns.
expr
ess
clea
rly s
tate
men
ts o
f fac
t an
d sh
ort
acco
unts
an
d de
scrip
tions
.
ask
ques
tions
to
clar
ify u
nder
stan
ding
.
mak
e ap
prop
riate
con
trib
utio
ns t
o th
e di
scus
sion
.
in s
trai
ghtfo
rwar
d fa
milia
r fo
rmal
exc
hang
es c
onne
cted
with
edu
catio
n, t
rain
ing,
wor
k an
d so
cial
rol
es.
A2
Way
stag
eTh
e sp
eake
r ca
n:
give
a s
impl
e de
scrip
tion
or p
rese
ntat
ion
of p
eopl
e,
livin
g or
wor
king
con
ditio
ns,
daily
rou
tines
, lik
es/d
islik
es,
etc
as a
sho
rt s
erie
s of
sim
ple
phra
ses
and
sent
ence
s lin
ked
into
a li
st.
gene
rally
follo
w c
hang
es o
f top
ic in
form
al
disc
ussi
on r
elat
ed t
o hi
s/he
r fie
ld w
hich
is
cond
ucte
d sl
owly
and
cle
arly.
exch
ange
rel
evan
t in
form
atio
n an
d gi
ve h
is/h
er
opin
ion
on p
ract
ical
pro
blem
s w
hen
aske
d di
rect
ly, p
rovi
ded
he/s
he r
ecei
ves
som
e he
lp w
ith
form
ulat
ion
and
can
ask
for
repe
titio
n of
key
poi
nts
if ne
cess
ary.
Leve
l 1Th
e sp
eake
r ca
n:
deal
with
pre
dict
able
day
-to-
day
activ
ities
.
ask
for
info
rmat
ion
to d
eal w
ith p
redi
ctab
le
day-
to-d
ay a
ctiv
ities
.
prov
ide
info
rmat
ion
to d
eal w
ith p
redi
ctab
le
day-
to-d
ay a
ctiv
ities
.
carr
y ou
t fa
milia
r an
d re
petit
ive
wor
k ta
sks,
in
clud
ing
sim
ple
soci
al e
xcha
nges
.
use
a w
ell-r
ehea
rsed
set
of e
xpre
ssio
ns a
nd
voca
bula
ry r
elev
ant
to t
he o
ccup
atio
nal c
onte
xt.
man
ipul
ate
the
gram
mar
of s
ome
recu
rrin
g se
nten
ce fo
rms.
39
MAP 4: Speaking scales (continued)
41
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 4
An
adul
t ca
n:
iden
tify
rele
vant
sou
rces
and
res
earc
h in
form
atio
n fo
r pl
anni
ng p
urpo
ses.
read
and
syn
thes
ise
info
rmat
ion
by id
entif
ying
the
va
rious
arg
umen
ts.
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
read
and
syn
thes
ise
exte
nded
doc
umen
ts a
bout
co
mpl
ex s
ubje
cts.
sele
ct a
nd r
ead
mat
eria
l tha
t co
ntai
ns t
he n
eede
d in
form
atio
n.
iden
tify
accu
rate
ly a
nd c
ompa
re t
he li
nes
of r
easo
ning
an
d m
ain
poin
ts fr
om t
he t
exts
and
imag
es.
C2
Mas
tery
The
read
er c
an:
unde
rsta
nd a
nd in
terp
ret
criti
cally
virt
ually
all
form
s of
the
writ
ten
lang
uage
incl
udin
g ab
stra
ct,
stru
ctur
ally
com
plex
, or
hig
hly
collo
quia
l lite
rary
an
d no
n-lit
erar
y w
ritin
gs.
unde
rsta
nd a
wid
e ra
nge
of lo
ng a
nd c
ompl
ex
text
s, a
ppre
ciat
ing
subt
le d
istin
ctio
ns o
f sty
le a
nd
impl
icit
as w
ell a
s ex
plic
it m
eani
ng.
Leve
l 5Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel c
an:
extr
act
accu
rate
ly in
form
atio
n of
a h
ighl
y sp
ecia
lised
nat
ure
from
a w
ide
rang
e of
writ
ten
sour
ces,
with
no
mor
e d
iffic
ulty
in u
nder
stan
din
g th
an a
nat
ive
spea
ker.
resp
ond
appr
opria
tely
to
all m
anne
r of
doc
umen
ts,
incl
udin
g th
ose
of a
com
plex
and
spe
cial
ised
or
sens
itive
nat
ure.
extr
act
info
rmat
ion
from
eith
er a
sin
gle
sour
ce o
r a
rang
e of
sou
rces
in o
rder
to
com
plet
e co
mpl
ex
occu
patio
nal t
asks
.
mak
e ex
pert
and
sop
hist
icat
ed u
se o
f dic
tiona
ries
and
othe
r re
fere
nce
sour
ces,
bei
ng q
uick
to
gras
p fin
e di
stin
ctio
ns.
in a
wid
e ra
nge
of m
ater
ial i
nclu
ding
spe
cial
ist,
tech
nica
l doc
umen
ts.
MAP 5: Reading scales
42 SECTION 3 MAPS ILLUSTRATING THE ALIGNMENT OF SCALES AND LEVELS
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
Leve
l 2A
n ad
ult
can:
trac
e an
d un
ders
tand
the
mai
n ev
ents
of c
ontin
uous
de
scrip
tive,
exp
lana
tory
and
per
suas
ive
text
s.
iden
tify
the
purp
ose
of a
tex
t an
d in
fer
mea
ning
whi
ch
is n
ot e
xplic
it.
iden
tify
the
mai
n po
ints
and
spe
cific
det
ail.
read
an
argu
men
t an
d id
entif
y th
e po
ints
of v
iew
.
read
crit
ical
ly t
o ev
alua
te a
nd c
ompa
re in
form
atio
n,
idea
s an
d op
inio
ns fr
om d
iffer
ent
sour
ces.
use
orga
nisa
tion
feat
ures
and
sys
tem
s to
loca
te t
exts
an
d in
form
atio
n.
use
diffe
rent
rea
ding
str
ateg
ies
to fi
nd a
nd o
btai
n in
form
atio
n, e
g sk
imm
ing,
sca
nnin
g, d
etai
led
rea
din
g.
sum
mar
ise
info
rmat
ion
from
long
er d
ocum
ents
.
read
and
und
erst
and
tech
nica
l voc
abul
ary.
use
refe
renc
e m
ater
ials
to
find
the
mea
ning
s of
un
fam
iliar
wor
ds.
in a
wid
e ra
nge
of t
ext
type
s.
C1
Op
erat
iona
l Pro
ficie
ncy
The
read
er c
an:
unde
rsta
nd in
det
ail l
engt
hy,
com
plex
tex
ts,
whe
ther
or
not
they
rel
ate
to h
is/h
er o
wn
area
of
spe
cial
ity,
prov
ided
s/h
e ca
n re
read
diff
icul
t se
ctio
ns.
unde
rsta
nd in
det
ail a
wid
e ra
nge
of le
ngth
y,
com
plex
tex
ts li
kely
to
be e
ncou
nter
ed in
soc
ial,
prof
essi
onal
or
acad
emic
life
, id
entif
ying
fine
r po
ints
of d
etai
l inc
ludi
ng a
ttitu
des
and
impl
ied
as w
ell a
s st
ated
opi
nion
s.
Leve
l 4Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
can
deal
with
mos
t te
xts,
bot
h ge
nera
l and
te
chni
cal,
rela
ting
to e
very
exp
ecte
d ty
pe o
f wor
k si
tuat
ion.
can
extr
act
deta
iled
info
rmat
ion
prom
ptly
from
te
xts
of a
rou
tine
natu
re.
can
relia
bly
deal
with
the
mos
t co
mpl
ex m
ater
ial
with
in h
is/h
er o
wn
field
.
can
scan
com
plex
tex
ts r
apid
ly in
ord
er fi
nd
rele
vant
info
rmat
ion.
can
‘rea
d be
twee
n th
e lin
es’
in o
rder
to
draw
in
fere
nces
and
con
clus
ions
from
tex
ts w
here
an
alys
es a
nd o
pini
ons
are
impl
icit
rath
er t
han
expl
icit.
may
nee
d to
be
sens
itive
to
the
cultu
ral c
onte
xt
or s
tylis
tic c
onve
ntio
ns o
f the
tex
t.
can
mak
e ex
pert
and
sop
hist
icat
ed u
se o
f di
ctio
narie
s an
d ot
her
refe
renc
e so
urce
s.
in a
ll m
anne
r of
doc
umen
ts,
incl
udin
g th
ose
of a
com
plex
or
sens
itive
nat
ure
enab
ling
him
/her
to
carr
you
t re
spon
sibl
e ta
sks.
Leve
l 1A
n ad
ult
can:
trac
e an
d un
ders
tand
the
mai
n ev
ents
of c
ontin
uous
de
scrip
tive,
exp
lana
tory
and
per
suas
ive
text
s.
reco
gnis
e ho
w la
ngua
ge a
nd o
ther
tex
tual
feat
ures
are
us
ed t
o ac
hiev
e di
ffere
nt p
urpo
ses,
eg
to in
stru
ct,
exp
lain
, d
escr
ibe,
per
suad
e.
iden
tify
the
mai
n po
ints
and
spe
cific
det
ail,
and
infe
r m
eani
ng fr
om im
ages
whi
ch is
not
exp
licit
in t
he t
ext.
use
orga
nisa
tion
and
stru
ctur
al fe
atur
es t
o lo
cate
in
form
atio
n, e
g co
nten
ts,
ind
ex,
men
us,
sub
head
ings
, p
arag
rap
hs.
use
diffe
rent
rea
ding
str
ateg
ies
to fi
nd a
nd o
btai
n in
form
atio
n.
use
refe
renc
e m
ater
ial t
o fin
d th
e m
eani
ng o
f unf
amilia
r w
ords
.
in r
epor
ts,
inst
ruct
iona
l, ex
plan
ator
y an
d pe
rsua
sive
tex
ts.
B2
Vant
age
The
read
er c
an:
read
with
a la
rge
degr
ee o
f ind
epen
denc
e, a
dapt
ing
styl
e an
d sp
eed
of r
eadi
ng t
o di
ffere
nt t
exts
and
pu
rpos
es,
and
usin
g ap
prop
riate
ref
eren
ce s
ourc
es
sele
ctiv
ely.
read
with
a b
road
rea
ding
voc
abul
ary,
but
may
ex
perie
nce
som
e di
fficu
lty w
ith lo
w fr
eque
ncy
idio
ms.
scan
qui
ckly
thr
ough
long
and
com
plex
tex
ts,
loca
ting
rele
vant
det
ails
.
obta
in in
form
atio
n, id
eas
and
opin
ions
from
hig
hly
spec
ialis
ed s
ourc
es w
ithin
his
/her
fiel
d.
unde
rsta
nd s
peci
alis
ed a
rtic
les
outs
ide
his/
her
field
,pr
ovid
ed h
e/sh
e ca
n us
e a
dict
iona
ry o
ccas
iona
lly
to c
onfir
m h
is/h
er in
terp
reta
tion
of t
erm
inol
ogy.
Leve
l 3Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
can
deal
with
mos
t te
xts,
bot
h ge
nera
l and
te
chni
cal,
rela
ting
to r
outin
e w
ork
situ
atio
ns.
can
oper
ate
in a
wor
k si
tuat
ion
in w
hich
the
fore
ign
lang
uage
is t
he n
orm
al m
ediu
m o
f com
mun
icat
ion,
as
wel
l as
hand
ling
inco
min
g do
cum
ents
from
an
exte
rnal
fore
ign
lang
uage
sou
rce.
can
scan
tex
ts fo
r re
quire
d de
tails
and
brin
g to
geth
er in
form
atio
n, id
eas
and
opin
ions
from
di
ffere
nt p
arts
of t
he t
ext
in o
rder
to
draw
ap
prop
riate
con
clus
ions
.
in d
ocum
ents
with
a v
arie
ty o
f for
mat
s an
d re
gist
ers,
deal
ing
with
top
ics
of a
mai
nly
fam
iliar
natu
re a
ndw
hose
con
tent
is m
ainl
y lit
eral
, th
ough
occ
asio
nal
impl
icit
mea
ning
mig
ht n
eed
to b
e ex
trac
ted.
4443
Ent
ry 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
trac
e an
d un
ders
tand
the
mai
n ev
ents
of c
hron
olog
ical
, co
ntin
uous
des
crip
tive
and
expl
anat
ory
text
s of
mor
e th
an o
ne p
arag
raph
.
reco
gnis
e th
e di
ffere
nt p
urpo
ses
of t
exts
at
this
leve
l.
reco
gnis
e an
d un
ders
tand
the
org
anis
atio
nal f
eatu
res
and
typi
cal l
angu
age
of in
stru
ctio
nal t
exts
, eg
use
of
imp
erat
ives
/sec
ond
per
son.
unde
rsta
nd t
he m
ain
poin
ts a
nd id
eas
and
pred
ict
wor
ds fr
om c
onte
xt.
unde
rsta
nd a
nd u
se o
rgan
isat
iona
l fea
ture
s to
loca
te
info
rmat
ion,
eg
cont
ents
, in
dex
, m
enus
.
skim
rea
d th
e tit
le,
head
ings
and
illu
stra
tions
to
deci
de
if m
ater
ial i
s of
inte
rest
.
scan
tex
ts t
o lo
cate
info
rmat
ion.
obta
in s
peci
fic in
form
atio
n th
roug
h de
taile
d re
adin
g.
rela
te a
n im
age
to p
rint
and
use
it to
obt
ain
mea
ning
.
reco
gnis
e an
d un
ders
tand
rel
evan
t sp
ecia
list
key
wor
ds.
read
and
und
erst
and
wor
ds a
nd p
hras
es c
omm
only
us
ed o
n fo
rms.
use
a di
ctio
nary
to
find
the
mea
ning
of u
nfam
iliar
wor
ds.
use
first
and
sec
ond
plac
e le
tter
to
find
and
sequ
ence
w
ords
in a
lpha
betic
al o
rder
.
in t
exts
suc
h as
form
s, n
otes
, re
cord
s, e
-mai
ls,
narr
ativ
es,
lett
ers,
dia
gram
s, s
impl
e in
stru
ctio
ns,
shor
t re
port
s.
B1
Thr
esho
ldTh
e re
ader
can
:
read
str
aigh
tforw
ard
fact
ual t
exts
on
subj
ects
re
late
d to
his
/her
fiel
d an
d in
tere
st w
ith a
sa
tisfa
ctor
y le
vel o
f com
preh
ensi
on.
scan
long
er t
exts
in o
rder
to
loca
te d
esire
d in
form
atio
n, a
nd g
athe
r in
form
atio
n fro
m d
iffer
ent
part
s of
a t
ext,
or
from
diff
eren
t te
xts
in o
rder
to
fulfi
l a s
peci
fic t
ask.
iden
tify
the
mai
n co
nclu
sion
s in
cle
arly
sig
nalle
d ar
gum
enta
tive
text
s.
reco
gnis
e th
e lin
e of
arg
umen
t in
the
tre
atm
ent
of t
he is
sue
pres
ente
d, t
houg
h no
t ne
cess
arily
in
det
ail.
Leve
l 2Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
can
unde
rsta
nd t
exts
on
fam
iliar,
rout
ine
mat
ters
, an
d ob
tain
bot
h sp
ecifi
c de
tails
and
the
gis
t of
w
ritte
n an
d pr
inte
d co
mm
unic
atio
ns o
f a m
ore
exte
nded
nat
ure
than
at
leve
l 1.
can
relia
bly
advi
se o
n th
e co
nten
t of
mes
sage
s an
d do
cum
ents
.
can
hand
le m
ater
ial c
onta
inin
g bo
th fa
cts
and
opin
ions
.
has
suffi
cien
t gr
asp
of s
ente
nce
stru
ctur
e to
un
ders
tand
mea
ning
bey
ond
that
sig
nalle
d by
fa
milia
r se
t ph
rase
s.
can
dem
onst
rate
the
abi
lity
to s
kim
and
sca
n lo
nger
tex
ts t
o pi
ck o
ut it
ems
rele
vant
to
his/
her
task
or
appr
ecia
te t
he o
vera
ll gi
st.
can
use
a di
ctio
nary
or
sim
ilar
refe
renc
e so
urce
, de
mon
stra
ting
enou
gh g
ram
mat
ical
kno
wle
dge
to s
ee t
he c
onne
ctio
n be
twee
n a
text
wor
d an
d its
dic
tiona
ry e
ntry
form
.
in p
ublic
and
wor
k-re
late
d si
gns
and
notic
es,
stra
ight
forw
ard
gene
ral a
nd w
ork-
rela
ted
artic
les,
repo
rts
and
corr
espo
nden
ce,
com
pres
sed
text
s on
rout
ine
fam
iliar
topi
cs,
and
sim
ple
jour
nalis
tic s
ourc
es.
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Ent
ry 2
An
adul
t ca
n:
trac
e an
d un
ders
tand
the
mai
n ev
ents
of c
hron
olog
ical
an
d in
stru
ctio
nal t
exts
.
reco
gnis
e th
e di
ffere
nt p
urpo
ses
of t
exts
at
this
leve
l.
iden
tify
com
mon
sou
rces
of i
nfor
mat
ion.
use
illust
ratio
ns a
nd c
aptio
ns t
o lo
cate
info
rmat
ion.
read
and
und
erst
and
wor
ds o
n fo
rms
rela
ted
to
pers
onal
info
rmat
ion,
eg
first
nam
e, s
urna
me,
ad
dre
ss,
pos
tcod
e, a
ge,
dat
e of
birt
h.
reco
gnis
e hi
gh fr
eque
ncy
wor
ds a
nd w
ords
with
co
mm
on s
pellin
g pa
tter
ns.
use
phon
ic a
nd g
raph
ic k
now
ledg
e to
dec
ode
wor
ds.
use
a si
mpl
ified
dic
tiona
ry t
o fin
d th
e m
eani
ng o
f un
fam
iliar
wor
ds.
use
initi
al le
tter
s to
find
and
seq
uenc
e w
ords
in
alph
abet
ical
ord
er.
in t
exts
suc
h as
pub
lic s
igns
and
not
ices
, lis
ts,
form
s,no
tes,
rec
ords
, e-
mai
ls,
sim
ple
narr
ativ
es,
lett
ers
and
diag
ram
s.
A2
Way
stag
e Th
e re
ader
can
und
erst
and:
shor
t, s
impl
e te
xts
on fa
milia
r m
atte
rs o
f a c
oncr
ete
type
whi
ch c
onsi
st o
f hig
h fre
quen
cy e
very
day
or
job-
rela
ted
lang
uage
.
shor
t, s
impl
e te
xts
cont
aini
ng t
he h
ighe
st fr
eque
ncy
voca
bula
ry,
incl
udin
g a
prop
ortio
n of
sha
red
inte
rnat
iona
l voc
abul
ary
item
s.
Leve
l 1Th
e us
er a
t th
is le
vel:
can
unde
rsta
nd s
impl
e te
xts
on fa
milia
r, ev
eryd
ay
mat
ters
, an
d ob
tain
spe
cific
det
ails
abo
ut s
uch
mat
ters
from
sig
ns,
notic
es a
nd o
ther
eve
ryda
y so
urce
s.
can
hand
le m
ater
ial c
onsi
stin
g m
ainl
y of
hig
h fre
quen
cy d
aily
or
job-
rela
ted
lang
uage
.
can
iden
tify
key
poin
ts fr
om a
ran
ge o
f sim
ple
writ
ten
or p
rinte
d m
ater
ial w
hose
ove
rall
cont
ext
was
cle
ar,
and
conv
ey t
o ot
hers
or
act
appr
opria
tely
on,
suc
h in
form
atio
n.
can
use
a di
ctio
nary
or
sim
ilar
refe
renc
e so
urce
, th
ough
not
nec
essa
rily
to lo
cate
var
iant
form
s (e
g ve
rb fo
rms
diffe
ring
mar
kedl
y fro
m t
he in
finiti
ve).
Ent
ry 1
An
adul
t ca
n:
follo
w a
sho
rt n
arra
tive
on a
fam
iliar
topi
c or
exp
erie
nce.
reco
gnis
e th
e di
ffere
nt p
urpo
ses
of t
exts
at
this
leve
l.
poss
ess
a lim
ited,
mea
ning
ful s
ight
voc
abul
ary
of
wor
ds,
sign
s an
d sy
mbo
ls.
deco
de s
impl
e, r
egul
ar w
ords
.
reco
gnis
e th
e le
tter
s of
the
alp
habe
t in
bot
h up
per
and
low
er c
ase.
in t
exts
suc
h as
pub
lic s
igns
and
not
ices
, lis
ts,
form
s,re
cord
s, s
impl
e na
rrat
ives
.
A1
Bre
akth
roug
hTh
e re
ader
can
und
erst
and:
very
sho
rt,
sim
ple
text
s a
sing
le p
hras
e at
a t
ime,
pi
ckin
g up
fam
iliar
nam
es,
wor
ds a
nd b
asic
ph
rase
s an
d re
read
ing
as r
equi
red.
So
urce
s:
QC
A,
Key
Ski
lls U
nits
3 a
nd 4
, 20
00
QC
A,
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
y an
d
num
erac
y, 2
000
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e,
Com
mon
Eur
opea
n Fr
amew
ork,
200
1:
p.58
+ 7
5, 7
8, 7
9, 8
1
Lang
uage
s N
atio
nal T
rain
ing
Org
anis
atio
n,
The
Nat
iona
l Lan
guag
e S
tand
ard
s, 2
000:
p.
51,
55,
60,
69,
73,
77
MAP 5: Reading scales (continued)
45 46 SECTION 3 MAPS ILLUSTRATING THE ALIGNMENT OF SCALES AND LEVELS
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 4
An
adul
t ca
n
esta
blis
h op
port
uniti
es fo
r w
ritin
g ov
er a
n ex
tend
ed
perio
d of
tim
e.
writ
e ex
tend
ed d
ocum
ents
, st
ruct
urin
g th
e m
ater
ial
and
pres
entin
g ar
gum
ents
and
info
rmat
ion
in a
logi
cal
sequ
ence
, en
surin
g th
at s
pellin
g, p
unct
uatio
n an
d gr
amm
ar a
re a
ccur
ate.
orga
nise
and
cle
arly
pre
sent
rel
evan
t in
form
atio
n,
illust
ratin
g by
dra
win
g co
mpa
rison
s, p
rovi
ding
ex
ampl
es t
hat
rela
te t
o th
e in
tere
sts
of t
he r
eade
r(s)
and
usin
g im
ages
to
illust
rate
com
plex
poi
nts.
Key
Ski
lls S
pec
ifica
tio
n Le
vel 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
writ
e di
ffere
nt t
ypes
of d
ocum
ents
abo
ut c
ompl
ex
subj
ects
.
sele
ct a
nd u
se a
sty
le o
f writ
ing
that
is a
ppro
pria
te t
o th
e pu
rpos
e an
d co
mpl
ex s
ubje
ct m
atte
r.
orga
nise
rel
evan
t in
form
atio
n cl
early
and
coh
eren
tly,
usin
g sp
ecia
list
voca
bula
ry w
hen
appr
opria
te.
ensu
re t
hat
his/
her
text
is le
gibl
e, a
nd t
he s
pellin
g,
gram
mar
and
pun
ctua
tion
accu
rate
, so
tha
t th
e m
eani
ng is
cle
ar.
synt
hesi
s th
e ke
y in
form
atio
n in
a fo
rm t
hat
is r
elva
nt
to t
he r
eade
r’s p
urpo
se.
C2
Mas
tery
The
writ
er c
an:
writ
e cl
ear,
smoo
thly
flow
ing,
com
plex
tex
ts in
an
app
ropr
iate
and
effe
ctiv
e st
yle
and
a lo
gica
l st
ruct
ure
whi
ch h
elps
the
rea
der
to fi
nd s
igni
fican
t po
ints
.
prod
uce
clea
r, sm
ooth
ly fl
owin
g, c
ompl
ex r
epor
ts,
artic
les
or e
ssay
s w
hich
pre
sent
a c
ase,
or
give
cr
itica
l app
reci
atio
n of
pro
posa
ls o
r lit
erar
y w
orks
.
prov
ide
an a
ppro
pria
te a
nd e
ffect
ive
logi
cal
stru
ctur
e w
hich
hel
ps t
he r
eade
r to
find
sig
nific
ant
poin
ts.
Leve
l 5Th
e w
riter
can
effe
ctiv
ely:
use
the
writ
ten
form
at
the
high
est
pro
fess
iona
l, co
mm
erci
al o
r ad
min
istr
ativ
e le
vels
.
writ
e hi
ghly
-spe
cial
ised
tex
ts.
com
pile
rep
orts
and
pro
duce
tec
hnic
al
spec
ifica
tions
and
pro
duct
lite
ratu
re t
o a
publ
isha
ble
stan
dard
.
exch
ange
hig
hly
spec
ialis
ed a
nd c
ompl
ex
corr
espo
nden
ce.
pres
ent
and
deba
te w
ritte
n ar
gum
ents
on
com
plex
m
atte
rs,
usin
g la
ngua
ge t
o pe
rsua
sive
effe
ct.
writ
e te
xts
inte
nded
for
publ
icat
ion.
writ
e w
ith fl
uenc
y an
d se
nsiti
vity
on
a w
ide
rang
e of
mat
ters
, us
ing
a nu
mbe
r of
diff
eren
t re
gist
ers.
Leve
l 2A
n ad
ult
can:
plan
and
dra
ft w
ritin
g.
judg
e ho
w m
uch
to w
rite
and
the
leve
l of d
etai
l to
incl
ude.
pres
ent
info
rmat
ion
and
idea
s in
a lo
gica
l or
pers
uasi
ve
sequ
ence
, us
ing
para
grap
hs w
here
app
ropr
iate
.
use
form
at a
nd s
truc
ture
to
orga
nise
writ
ing
for
diffe
rent
pur
pose
s.
use
form
al a
nd in
form
al la
ngua
ge a
ppro
pria
te t
o pu
rpos
e an
d au
dien
ce.
use
diffe
rent
sty
les
of w
ritin
g fo
r di
ffere
nt p
urpo
ses,
eg
per
suas
ive
tech
niq
ues,
sup
por
ting
evid
ence
, te
chni
cal v
ocab
ular
y.
cons
truc
t co
mpl
ex s
ente
nces
.
use
corr
ect
gram
mar
, eg
sub
ject
-ver
b a
gree
men
t,
corr
ect
and
con
sist
ent
use
of t
ense
.
use
pron
ouns
so
that
the
ir m
eani
ng is
cle
ar.
punc
tuat
e se
nten
ces
corr
ectly
and
use
pun
ctua
tion
accu
rate
ly, e
g co
mm
as,
apos
trop
hes,
inve
rted
co
mm
as.
spel
l cor
rect
ly w
ords
use
d m
ost
ofte
n in
wor
k, s
tudi
es
and
daily
life
, in
clud
ing
fam
iliar
tech
nica
l wor
ds.
proo
f-re
ad a
nd r
evis
e w
ritin
g fo
r ac
cura
cy a
nd m
eani
ng.
prod
uce
legi
ble
text
.
in a
wid
e ra
nge
of d
ocum
ents
.
C1
Op
erat
iona
l Pro
ficie
ncy
The
writ
er:
can
writ
e cl
ear,
wel
l-str
uctu
red
text
s on
com
plex
su
bjec
ts,
unde
rlini
ng t
he r
elev
ant
salie
nt is
sues
, ex
pand
ing
and
supp
ortin
g po
ints
of v
iew
at
som
e le
ngth
with
sub
sidi
ary
poin
ts,
reas
ons
and
rele
vant
ex
ampl
es,
and
roun
ding
off
with
an
appr
opria
te
conc
lusi
on.
can
expr
ess
him
/her
self
with
cla
rity
and
prec
isio
n,
rela
ting
to t
he a
ddre
ssee
flex
ibly
and
effe
ctiv
ely.
layo
ut,
para
grap
hing
and
pun
ctua
tion
are
cons
iste
nt a
nd h
elpf
ul.
spel
ling
is a
ccur
ate,
apa
rt fr
om o
ccas
iona
l slip
s of
th
e pe
n.
Leve
l 4Th
e w
riter
can
effe
ctiv
ely:
deal
with
com
plex
wor
k ta
sks.
exch
ange
cor
resp
onde
nce
usin
g la
ngua
ge o
f va
ried
com
plex
ity a
nd t
echn
ical
ity.
com
pile
rep
orts
, dr
aft
prod
uct
info
rmat
ion
and
writ
e w
ith s
ome
fluen
cy o
n a
varie
ty o
f mat
ters
.
conv
ey in
form
atio
n, id
eas
and
opin
ions
in w
ritin
g.
use
a w
ide
rang
e of
voc
abul
ary
and
a se
cure
gra
sp
of g
ram
mar
to
ensu
re t
hat
his/
her
writ
ten
prod
uctio
n is
bot
h ac
cura
te a
nd a
ppro
pria
te.
writ
e fo
r di
ffere
nt a
udie
nces
, sh
owin
g se
nsiti
vity
to
the
situ
atio
n as
nec
essa
ry.
Leve
l 1A
n ad
ult
can:
plan
and
dra
ft w
ritin
g.
judg
e ho
w m
uch
to w
rite
and
the
leve
l of d
etai
l to
incl
ude.
pres
ent
info
rmat
ion
in a
logi
cal s
eque
nce,
usi
ng
para
grap
hs w
here
app
ropr
iate
.
use
lang
uage
sui
tabl
e fo
r pu
rpos
e an
d au
dien
ce.
use
form
at a
nd s
truc
ture
for
diffe
rent
pur
pose
s.
writ
e in
com
plet
e se
nten
ces.
use
corr
ect
gram
mar
, eg
sub
ject
-ver
b a
gree
men
t,
corr
ect
use
of t
ense
.
punc
tuat
e se
nten
ces
corr
ectly
and
use
pun
ctua
tion
so t
hat
mea
ning
is c
lear
.
spel
l cor
rect
ly w
ords
use
d m
ost
ofte
n in
wor
k, s
tudi
es
and
daily
life
.
proo
f-re
ad a
nd r
evis
e w
ritin
g fo
r ac
cura
cy a
nd m
eani
ng.
in d
ocum
ents
suc
h as
form
s, r
ecor
ds,
e-m
ails
, le
tter
s,na
rrat
ives
, in
stru
ctio
ns,
repo
rts,
exp
lana
tions
.
B2
Vant
age
The
writ
er:
can
writ
e cl
ear,
deta
iled
text
s on
a v
arie
ty o
f su
bjec
ts r
elat
ed t
o hi
s/he
r fie
ld o
f int
eres
t,
synt
hesi
sing
and
eva
luat
ing
info
rmat
ion
and
argu
men
ts fr
om a
num
ber
of s
ourc
es.
can
expr
ess
new
s an
d vi
ews
effe
ctiv
ely
in w
ritin
g an
d re
late
to
thos
e of
oth
ers.
prod
uce
clea
rly in
tellig
ible
con
tinuo
us w
ritin
g w
hich
fo
llow
s st
anda
rd la
yout
and
par
agra
phin
g co
nven
tions
.
accu
rate
but
may
sho
w s
igns
of m
othe
r to
ngue
in
fluen
ce.
can
writ
e an
ess
ay o
r re
port
whi
ch d
evel
ops
an a
rgum
ent
syst
emat
ical
ly w
ith a
ppro
pria
te
high
light
ing
of s
igni
fican
t po
ints
and
rel
evan
t su
ppor
ting
deta
il.
eval
uate
diff
eren
t id
eas
or s
olut
ions
to
a pr
oble
m.
Leve
l 3Th
e w
riter
can
effe
ctiv
ely:
deal
with
var
ied
wor
k ta
sks.
writ
e co
rres
pond
ence
to
deal
with
a v
arie
ty o
f fa
ctua
l and
exp
ress
ive
requ
irem
ents
.
writ
e fa
ctua
l and
exp
ress
ive
sum
mar
ies
to fu
lfil
varie
d w
ork
requ
irem
ents
.
prod
uce
writ
ten
acco
unts
, co
ntai
ning
bot
h fa
ctua
l in
form
atio
n an
d op
inio
ns,
with
app
ropr
iate
con
tent
an
d or
gani
satio
n.
prod
uce
writ
ing
of v
aryi
ng le
ngth
s an
d fo
r va
ryin
g pu
rpos
es,
with
som
e de
gree
of f
acilit
y in
ada
ptin
g w
ritin
g w
ithin
a fa
milia
r ra
nge
of s
tyle
s an
d su
bjec
t m
atte
r to
diff
eren
t re
ader
ship
s.
writ
e w
ith a
hig
h de
gree
of a
ccur
acy
with
in t
his
text
ual r
ange
, al
thou
gh h
avin
g re
gula
r re
cour
se
to r
outin
e re
fere
nce
sour
ces
to d
o so
.
MAP 6: Writing scales
48
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
yC
om
mo
n E
uro
pea
n F
ram
ewo
rkN
atio
nal L
ang
uag
e S
tand
ard
s
Ent
ry 3
An
adul
t ca
n:
writ
e to
com
mun
icat
e in
form
atio
n an
d op
inio
ns w
ith
som
e ad
apta
tion
to t
he in
tend
ed a
udie
nce.
writ
e a
lett
er t
o a
loca
l new
spap
er,
mag
azin
e or
ne
wsl
ette
r.
writ
e a
shor
t m
emo
or le
tter
to
colle
ague
s.
writ
e do
wn
dire
ctio
ns.
plan
and
dra
ft w
ritin
g.
orga
nise
writ
ing
in s
hort
par
agra
phs.
sequ
ence
chr
onol
ogic
al w
ritin
g.
writ
e in
com
plet
e se
nten
ces.
use
corr
ect
basi
c gr
amm
ar,
eg a
pp
rop
riate
ver
b t
ense
, su
bje
ct-v
erb
agr
eem
ent.
use
punc
tuat
ion
corr
ectly
, eg
cap
ital l
ette
rs,
full
stop
s,
que
stio
n m
arks
, ex
clam
atio
n m
arks
.
spel
l cor
rect
ly c
omm
on w
ords
and
rel
evan
t ke
y w
ords
fo
r w
ork
and
spec
ial i
nter
est.
proo
f-re
ad a
nd c
orre
ct w
ritin
g fo
r gr
amm
ar a
nd
spel
ling.
prod
uce
legi
ble
text
.
use
a di
ctio
nary
to
find
wor
d m
eani
ngs
and
spel
lings
.
in d
ocum
ents
suc
h as
form
s, n
otes
, re
cord
s, e
-mai
ls,
lett
ers,
nar
rativ
es,
sim
ple
inst
ruct
ions
, sh
ort
repo
rts.
B1
Thr
esho
ldTh
e w
riter
:
can
writ
e st
raig
htfo
rwar
d co
nnec
ted
text
s on
a
rang
e of
fam
iliar
subj
ects
with
in h
is/h
er fi
eld
of
inte
rest
, by
link
ing
a se
ries
of s
hort
er d
iscr
ete
elem
ents
into
a li
near
seq
uenc
e.
can
conv
ey in
form
atio
n an
d id
eas
on a
bstr
act
as
wel
l as
conc
rete
top
ics,
che
ck in
form
atio
n an
d as
k ab
out
or e
xpla
in p
robl
ems
with
rea
sona
ble
prec
isio
n.
can
writ
e pe
rson
al le
tter
s an
d no
tes
aski
ng fo
r or
con
veyi
ng s
impl
e in
form
atio
n of
imm
edia
te
rele
vanc
e, g
ettin
g ac
ross
the
poi
nt h
e/sh
e fe
els
to b
e im
port
ant.
can
prod
uce
clea
rly in
tellig
ible
con
tinuo
us w
ritin
g w
hich
follo
ws
stan
dard
layo
ut a
nd p
arag
raph
ing
conv
entio
ns.
spel
ling,
pun
ctua
tion
and
layo
ut a
re a
ccur
ate
enou
gh t
o be
follo
wed
mos
t of
the
tim
e.
Leve
l 2Th
e w
riter
can
effe
ctiv
ely:
deal
with
rou
tine
and
daily
act
iviti
es.
com
pile
rou
tine
reco
rds
usin
g se
t ph
rase
s an
d st
ruct
ures
.
com
pose
not
es a
nd s
hort
mes
sage
s to
fulfi
l ro
utin
e an
d da
ily r
equi
rem
ents
.
com
pose
cor
resp
onde
nce
usin
g se
t ph
rase
s an
d st
ruct
ures
.
writ
e si
mpl
e le
tter
s, fa
xes
and
e-m
ails
on
fam
iliar
subj
ects
, us
ing
larg
ely
stan
dard
form
ats
and
lang
uage
.
prod
uce
sequ
ence
s of
sta
tem
ents
to
expl
ain
sim
ple
oper
atio
ns o
r co
nvey
inst
ruct
ions
.
prod
uce
cont
inuo
us s
hort
tex
ts w
ith li
nked
se
nten
ces
to r
epor
t ev
ents
and
set
out
sim
ple
idea
s.
prod
uce
corr
ect
text
inde
pend
ently
, co
mbi
ning
m
ainl
y se
t ph
rase
s an
d fa
milia
r la
ngua
ge w
hich
he
/she
can
ada
pt u
sing
sim
ple
gram
mat
ical
m
anip
ulat
ion.
Ent
ry 2
An
adul
t ca
n:
writ
e a
mes
sage
to
a co
lleag
ue o
n w
ork
issu
es.
writ
e a
brie
f let
ter
or p
ostc
ard.
use
writ
ten
wor
ds a
nd p
hras
es t
o re
cord
or
pres
ent
info
rmat
ion.
cons
truc
t si
mpl
e an
d co
mpo
und
sent
ence
s, u
sing
co
njun
ctio
ns t
o co
nnec
t tw
o cl
ause
s, e
g as
, an
d,
but
.
use
adje
ctiv
es.
use
punc
tuat
ion
corr
ectly
, eg
cap
ital l
ette
rs,
full
stop
s an
d q
uest
ion
mar
ks.
use
a ca
pita
l let
ter
for
prop
er n
ouns
.
spel
l cor
rect
ly t
he m
ajor
ity o
f per
sona
l det
ails
and
fa
milia
r co
mm
on w
ords
.
prod
uce
legi
ble
text
.
use
a si
mpl
ified
dic
tiona
ry t
o fin
d m
eani
ngs
and
spel
l w
ords
.
in d
ocum
ents
suc
h as
form
s, li
sts,
mes
sage
s, n
otes
,re
cord
s, e
-mai
ls,
sim
ple
narr
ativ
es.
A2
Way
stag
eTh
e w
riter
can
:
writ
e a
serie
s of
sim
ple
phra
ses
and
sent
ence
s lin
ked
with
sim
ple
conn
ecto
rs li
ke a
nd,
but
and
bec
ause
.
writ
e sh
ort,
sim
ple
form
ulai
c no
tes
rela
ting
to
mat
ters
in a
reas
of i
mm
edia
te n
eed.
copy
sho
rt s
ente
nces
on
ever
yday
sub
ject
s,
eg d
irect
ions
how
to
get
som
ewhe
re.
writ
e w
ith r
easo
nabl
e ph
onet
ic a
ccur
acy
(but
not
ne
cess
arily
fully
sta
ndar
d sp
ellin
g) s
hort
wor
ds t
hat
are
in h
is/h
er o
ral v
ocab
ular
y.
writ
e sh
ort,
sim
ple
form
ulai
c no
tes
rela
ting
to
mat
ters
in a
reas
of i
mm
edia
te n
eed.
writ
e ve
ry s
impl
e pe
rson
al le
tter
s ex
pres
sing
tha
nks
and
apol
ogy.
take
a s
hort
, si
mpl
e m
essa
ge p
rovi
ded
he/s
he c
an
ask
for
repe
titio
n an
d re
form
ulat
ion.
Leve
l 1Th
e w
riter
can
effe
ctiv
ely:
deal
with
pre
dict
able
day
-to-
day
activ
ities
.
writ
e do
wn
rout
ine
fact
s an
d da
ta r
elat
ed t
o pr
edic
tabl
e da
y-to
-day
act
iviti
es.
writ
e si
mpl
e m
essa
ges.
use
the
writ
ten
form
of t
he la
ngua
ge in
a li
mite
d ra
nge
of s
tand
ard
form
ats,
eg
fillin
g in
sta
ndar
d fo
rms
or c
ompo
sing
sta
ndar
d le
tter
s us
ing
stoc
k ph
rase
s an
d fo
rmat
s.
use
a sm
all n
umbe
r of
mem
oris
ed s
ente
nces
and
in
divi
dual
wor
ds a
nd s
et p
hras
es,
whi
ch h
e/sh
e ca
n su
bstit
ute
to a
dapt
exi
stin
g si
mpl
e te
xts.
Ent
ry 1
An
adul
t ca
n:
writ
e hi
s/he
r ow
n na
me
and
addr
ess
on a
n of
ficia
l fo
rm/f
or a
n em
ploy
er.
writ
e a
shor
t m
essa
ge t
o a
fam
ily m
embe
r, pa
rtne
r, fla
tmat
e or
frie
nd.
writ
e gr
eetin
gs c
ards
acc
urat
ely.
use
writ
ten
wor
ds a
nd p
hras
es t
o re
cord
or
pres
ent
info
rmat
ion.
cons
truc
t a
sim
ple
sent
ence
punc
tuat
e a
sim
ple
sent
ence
with
a c
apita
l let
ter
and
full
stop
.
use
a ca
pita
l let
ter
for
pers
onal
pro
noun
‘I’.
spel
l cor
rect
ly s
ome
pers
onal
key
wor
ds a
nd fa
milia
r w
ords
.
writ
e th
e le
tter
s of
the
alp
habe
t us
ing
uppe
r an
d lo
wer
ca
se.
in d
ocum
ents
suc
h as
form
s, li
sts,
mes
sage
s, n
otes
,re
cord
s
A1
Bre
akth
roug
hTh
e w
riter
can
:
writ
e si
mpl
e is
olat
ed p
hras
es a
nd s
ente
nces
.
ask
for
or p
ass
on p
erso
nal d
etai
ls in
writ
ten
form
.
copy
fam
iliar
wor
ds a
nd s
hort
phr
ases
, eg
sim
ple
sign
s or
inst
ruct
ions
, na
mes
of e
very
day
obje
cts,
na
mes
of s
hops
and
set
phr
ases
use
d re
gula
rly.
spel
l his
/her
add
ress
, na
tiona
lity
and
othe
r pe
rson
al d
etai
ls.
writ
e nu
mbe
rs a
nd d
ates
, ow
n na
me,
nat
iona
lity,
ad
dres
s, a
ge,
date
of b
irth
or a
rriv
al in
the
cou
ntry
, et
c su
ch a
s on
a h
otel
reg
istr
atio
n fo
rm.
So
urce
s:
QC
A,
Key
Ski
lls U
nits
3 a
nd 4
, 20
00
QC
A,
Nat
iona
l sta
ndar
ds
for
adul
t lit
erac
y an
d
num
erac
y, 2
000
Cou
ncil
of E
urop
e,
Com
mon
Eur
opea
n Fr
amew
ork,
200
1:
p.61
+ 6
2, 8
4, 1
18
Lang
uage
s N
atio
nal T
rain
ing
Org
anis
atio
n,
The
Nat
iona
l Lan
guag
e S
tand
ard
s, 2
000:
p.
107,
111
, 11
6, 1
21,
126
47
MAP 6: Writing scales (continued)
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
4.1Uses of the mapsTo date most use has been made of Map 1, the overall alignment of thedifferent scales to the NQF. Map 1 hasenabled QCA to cross refer the levels to which awarding bodies said their ESOL qualifications were mapped, usuallyfrom the Common European Frameworkand/or the National Language Standards,to the NQF.
In order to do this with some confidence it was necessary to have the underpinningdetailed mapping which is provided by Maps 2 to 6. These maps havedemonstrated that the skills alignmentsacross the scales are robust. Responsesto the consultation on the draft reportshowed that people welcomed the preciseand detailed nature of the mapping oflanguage skills, and the fact that it ispossible to track back the exact source of the descriptors through the referencesat the bottom of Maps 2 to 6.
A further outcome of the mapping hasbeen that it is now possible to indicatesome broad equivalence betweenaccredited ESOL qualifications and otherqualifications in English which are aimedprimarily at native speakers. Qualificationsin English language placed at the samelevel in the NQF by application of Map 1 can be regarded as being broadlyequivalent in terms of level of languageskills, irrespective of their client groups.
It is anticipated that this will assist inmaking progression in English languagemuch clearer to a wider group of usersthan in the past.
Some other applications of the maps fordifferent users are suggested below.
Teachers can refer to the levels anddescriptors of language proficiency as a guide when placing students on programmes, planning theirachievement targets, and advisingthem on the choice of qualifications at appropriate levels. They can also use the level descriptors for the internalevaluation of students’ progression andfor planning courses in conjunction withthe Adult ESOL Core Curriculum.
Learners and language users canrefer to the scales to assess their own language progress and targets in conjunction with the Adult ESOLCore Curriculum. Working with a tutor,learners can define the language levelsof their targets, goals and activities. An example of this can be found in the European Language Portfolio(CILT/LNTO 2002), in which learnerscan use excerpts from the NationalLanguage Standards and the CommonEuropean Framework to record theirown language-learning progress,experience and targets, aligning theirachievement against national andinternational standards, as a steptowards managing their own learning.
Section 4Next steps
50 SECTION 4 NEXT STEPS
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
Course planners can use the scales to define levels of difficulty, to identifysuitable texts, tasks and exercises, andto provide guidance for the coverage ofskills and content.
Admissions tutors can define thelanguage requirement of educationalcourses by reference to the standardsidentified by the levels. In particular,English-language entry requirements for Further and Higher Education canbe set by determining qualifications at the appropriate NQF level. Tutors will also be able to locate national andinternational qualifications on the mapsand so decide whether any qualificationthat claims alignment to any of thescales fulfils their requirements.
Employers will find the competency or‘can-do’ statements valuable in forminga view of what recruits and employeesshould be able to do in the Englishlanguage, given their formal languagequalifications. So, for example, anemployer can define the targetlanguage level for any job theircompany, and applicants’ languagequalifications can be matched againstthese levels as part of the short-listingprocedure. An important consideration,however, will be the ‘currency’ of thequalification: if it were awarded morethan a year or so previously, theemployer would normally expectevidence of language maintenance in the workplace or through refreshercourses.
Awarding bodies can use the maps to help them identify the levels of theirexisting qualifications, and as a startingpoint when designing new ones. Thescales can also be used to inform the setting of papers at appropriatelevels of challenge and to help defineappropriate tasks for testing thechosen skills at a particular NQF level.
Publishers commissioning materials tosupport teaching and learning will alsofind the maps helpful to refer writers tofor targeting texts, tasks and activitiesto particular levels and skills.
4.2Future plans andpossibilities The uses above are merely illustrativeapplications. Different users are likely to find other applications over time.Possible spin-off developments in thefuture could include:
illustrating the skills described in themaps with exemplars of expectedinputs (texts that learners at each levelmight be expected to handle) andoutputs (samples of learners’ spokenand written performance at each level). A follow-up project looking atexemplars for writing from Entry 1 toLevel 2 is currently underway;
extending the work from adult learningto the learning of English by secondaryand primary school age groups, whichwould require consideration of issues
51
of maturity and cognitive development.Each year there are many younglearners who enter the UK schoolsystem at different points, with little or no English, suggesting an on-goingneed for appropriate levels, descriptorsand possibly qualifications for theseage groups;
building on the cross-boundary natureof this work, which links differentsectors of education and language use: adult native-speaker literacy and communication, English as asecond/additional language, English as a foreign language, and ModernForeign Languages. It is anticipatedthat in the second round ofaccreditation of adult literacy and ESOL qualifications, the mapping will extend common ground and helpto establish more secure equivalence of qualifications in English;
bringing English and MFL specialiststogether to consider whetherapplication of the descriptions in themaps could help develop a system of equivalence between qualifications in English in England and qualificationsin other modern languages;
investigating whether the alignment of levels described in this report couldbe applied to some of the othercommunity languages spoken inEngland, to facilitate the developmentof a wider spectrum of qualificationsand enable those speakers to gaincredit for their first language skills.
At the start of this investigation severalresearch questions were posed (page 7),each of which has been addressed in thecourse of the report.
i) Is it possible to align the variouscommonly-used scales for describinglanguage proficiency and so enablesome cross reference between them?
Yes: the maps included in this reportenable users to see the alignment oflevels across all of the scales that arecommonly used in the UK and inEurope.
ii) Is it possible to align other scales withthe adult literacy standards and the KeySkills Communication Specificationsand hence to the NQF?
Yes: the user can now align the levelsof all the commonly used scales to theNational qualifications framework viathe maps.
iii) Is it possible to align language scalesspecifically designed to describeperformance in second or otherlanguages to, the Standards andSpecifications designed for all speakers living, studying and working in this country, thus identifying someequivalence between different scaleswith different purposes and fromdifferent sectors?
Section 5Summary andconclusions
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
52 SECTION 5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
Yes: although the scales investigatedwere originally designed for differentpurposes and different languagesectors, it has been possible to aligntheir levels through the can-dostatements, which were found to shareunderlying principles of constructionand description.
iv) Given that these alignments could bemade, would it be possible to use themto assign qualifications in English fromvarious sectors to levels in the nationalqualifications framework, thus relatingthem more closely to the mainstreamqualifications system of the UK whetherwere designed for first languagespeakers or speakers of otherlanguages?
Yes: the alignments illustrated in thisreport have enabled QCA and themajor awarding bodies to assign NQFlevels to a range of qualifications in the EFL/ESOL/EAL sectors, and theseawards are now being offered withassigned NQF levels. In the secondround of accreditation in 2004, theexistence of the maps alongside theESOL curriculum will enable awardingbodies to develop direct linkagesbetween the content and coverage inqualifications for ESOL candidates, thecurriculum and the NQF assigned level.
In addition:
the maps offer greater detail about thelanguage skills associated with eachlevel than has been available in thepast for those designing qualificationsin English language, literacy orcommunication primarily for nativespeakers;
the effect should be that in future thesequalifications will reflect this increasedshared knowledge of what constitutesperformance in English at differentlevels;
this should encourage confidence thatthere is genuine equivalence betweenadult literacy and ESOL qualifications in terms of level of demand, althoughthey may be oriented to the needs ofdifferent client groups.
Finally, it is hoped that, longer term, this work will underpin widespreadunderstanding and acceptance of thevalue of accredited qualifications for alllearners of English and that possession of these qualifications will help all nativespeakers and speakers of English as asecond language to progress, and take full advantage of the opportunities foreducation and employment in this country.
53
1 The national qualifications frameworkQCA, CCEA, ACCAC, 2000
2 The national standards for adult literacyQCA, 2000
3 Key Skills SpecificationsQCA, CCEA, ACCAC, 1999 and 2000
4 A language in common: assessing English as an additional languageQCA, 2000
5 Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessmentCouncil of Europe/Cambridge University Press, 2001
and
The European Language PortfolioCouncil of Europe/Languages National Training Organisation/Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research, 2002
6 The National Language Standards 2000Languages National Training Organisation, 2000
and
The National Language Standards in Action,Languages National Training Organisation, 2001
7 The ALTE FrameworkThe Association of Language Testers in Europe, 2001
8 The English-Speaking Union FrameworkLongman/English-Speaking Union, 1989
9 Adult ESOL Core CurriculumThe Basic Skills Agency/Department for Education and Skills, 2002
10 Adult Literacy Core Curriculum: including spoken communicationThe Basic Skills Agency/Department for Education and Skills, 2001
AppendixList of standards, scales and associated literature
PATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
54 APPENDIX LIST OF STANDARDS, SCALES AND ASSOCIATED LITERATURE
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English language
ABEEB Association of British ESOL Examining Boards
ACCAC Qualifications, Curriculum and Assessment Authority for Wales
ALTE Association of Language Testers in Europe
BSA Basic Skills Agency
CCEA(now CEA) Northern Ireland Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment
CEF Common European Framework
CILT Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research
DfEE Department for Education and Employment
DfES Department for Education and Skills
EAL English as an Additional Language
EFL English as a Foreign Language
ESL English as a Second Language
ESOL English for Speakers of Other Languages
ESU English-Speaking Union
GCSE General Certificate of Secondary Education
GNVQ General National Vocational Qualification
LNTO Languages National Training Organisation
MFL Modern Foreign Languages
NQF National qualifications framework
NVQ National Vocational Qualification
QCA Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
55
Key to abbreviations
pull-out-and-keep posterPathways to Proficiency:Mapping different language assessment scalesThe alignment of language proficiency scales
Notes:
1 In the national qualifications framework, levels 4 and 5 represent higher-level qualifications, A levels areat level 3, GCSE grades A-C at level 2 and GCSE grades D-G at level 1.
2 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, national standards for adult literacy and numeracy, 2000: Britishnational standards published as part of the adult basic skills strategy in order to specify the full range ofskills required for an adult to communicate confidently, effectively and efficiently.
3 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, Key Skills Units, 2000: These specify a range of key skills,including communication, required to operate effectively at the respective levels.
4 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, A language in common, 2000: National guidance relating toperformance of speakers of English as an Additional Language (EAL) within the school-based UKnational curriculum.
5 Council of Europe, Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, Cambridge UniversityPress, 2001: Descriptions of six levels of foreign language proficiency offered as international standards.
6 Languages National Training Organisation, The National Language Standards, 2000: British nationalstandards for the vocational use of foreign languages (including English as a Foreign Language).
7 There are no qualifications at pre-entry level; however the Pre-entry Curriculum Framework for literacy and numeracy provides clear milestones to enable learners to progress towards Entry 1, accreditation at pre-entry level is available if appropriate to the learner.
PurposeThe map shows the alignment of the principal scales used to describe adult literacy and Englishlanguage proficiency. All the scales are aligned to the levels of the UK national qualificationsframework (NQF). The levels of the NQF apply to all qualifications in the United Kingdom and are not restricted to languages.
OriginThe map, and the research which underpinned it, was originally commissioned by the Qualificationsand Curriculum Authority in 2001 as a tool to enable ESOL qualifications to be accredited throughalignment to the national qualifications framework. The accreditation took place from January toAugust 2002. The majority of English language qualifications offered by British awarding bodies are aligned to one or more of the scales on Map 1. In this way, qualifications in English as asecond, additional or foreign language can be aligned to the national qualifications framework.
ScalesThe map aligns five scales of adult literacy, communication and English to the national qualifications framework. Brief details of all of these scales are given beneath the map.
UsesThe map is relevant to a range of groups concerned with English language proficiency:
Teachers will find the maps useful when placing students on programmes and planning their achievement targets, and in advising them on appropriate qualifications.
Learners can refer to the scales to assess their own language progress and targets.
Awarding bodies can use the maps to identify the levels of their existing qualifications, and as a starting point when designing new ones, and examiners can use the scales to inform the setting of papers at appropriate levels of challenge.
Admissions tutors can define the English language requirement of educational courses by reference to the standards identified by the levels.
Employers will find the competency or ‘can-do’ statements valuable in forming a view of what recruits and employees should be able to do in English, given their formal languagequalifications.
Education materials writers and course planners can use the scales to define levels of difficulty, to identify suitable texts, tasks and exercises, and to provide guidance for the coverage of skills and content.
Further information A copy of the report from which the map is taken can be obtained from: QCA Publications, PO Box 99, Sudbury, Suffolk CO10 25N, order line 01787 88 4444. Details of all publications can be found at: http://www.qca.org.uk/cgi-bin/qcashop.
The Alignment of Language Proficiency Scales for assessing competence in English languagePATHWAYS TO PROFICIENCY
The alignment of languageproficiency scales
Mapping different languageassessment scales
Nationalqualificationsframework 1
National standards for adult literacy 2
Key Skills 3 National curriculum 4
Level 5 (Level 5)
8
Nationalcurriculum levels
2
(C2.2)
Level 5
Level 4 Level 4
Level 3 Level 3 C2 Mastery
Level 4Level 2Level 2 Level 2 C1 OperationalProficiency
Level 3Level 1Level 1 Level 1 B2 Vantage
Level 2Entry level 3
Entry level 2
Entry level 1
Entry level
Level 1Secure/Threshold
B1 Threshold
Level 1A2 Waystage
(Entry)A1 Breakthrough
Pre-entry 7
EAL Step 2
EAL Step 1
Council of Europe
Framework 5
National Language
Standards 6
QCA
Copies of this publication can be obtained from:
DfES Publications
PO Box 5050, Sherwood Park
Annesley, Nottingham
NG15 0DJ
Tel: 0845 6022260
Fax: 0845 6033360
Textphone: 0845 6055560
Email: [email protected]
Please quote ref: PTP
ISBN number: 1 84185 8471
© Crown Copyright 2003
Produced by the Department for Education and Skills
Extracts from this document may be produced for non-commercial
or training purposes on condition that the source is acknowledged.