What the CEFR is and isn’t

Zuraidah Mohd Don and Mardziah Hayati Abdullah

May 27, 2019 7:31 AM FMT NEWS online

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

represents the prevailing international standard for the teaching and learning
of languages. It is a globally recognised framework for describing language
learning, teaching and assessment. CEFR provides detailed descriptions of
what foreign or second language learners can do in terms of listening,
speaking, reading and writing at six levels of proficiency.

Language learners have traditionally been described rather vaguely as

beginners, intermediate learners or advanced learners. They are given letter
grades (e.g., A-, B+ or D) or numerical scores in reports or transcripts, but
these grades and numbers do not say much about what a learner is able to
do in the target language.

CEFR, however, is a little different. It also identifies three broad levels of

language proficiency: Basic (A1 and A2), Independent (B1 and B2), and
Proficient (C1 and C2), but it goes further and provides “can do” statements
at each level to describe a learner’s ability in some detail and in a positive
manner. In this way, we are given a clearer idea of what the levels actually
mean.

CEFR gives teachers, test developers, parents, the learners themselves, and
eventually employers, a much clearer picture of what someone at a given
level is capable of doing. In addition, the description of language proficiency
can be understood and interpreted in the same way by users everywhere. A
B1 learner in one school should in principle be able to do basically the same
things as a B1 learner in another school or even in another country that also
uses CEFR.

CEFR is a suitable and credible benchmark for English standards in Malaysia.

It is the outcome of more than 30 years of research on language teaching,
learning and assessment. Although it originated in Europe, CEFR is
recognised in more than 40 countries and is now used in countries far
beyond Europe, including Mexico, Canada, Japan, China and Vietnam.

Many international high-stakes tests such as IELTS, TOEFL and TOEIC are
aligned to CEFR. For these reasons, CEFR features prominently in the reform
of English language education in Malaysia, as laid out in English Language
Education Reform in Malaysia: The Roadmap (2015-2025).
There have been several misconceptions and seriously false ideas about
CEFR and its relationship with the roadmap, which need to be set right.

Misconception #1: CEFR is the reform plan

CEFR and the reform plan (the roadmap) are, most emphatically, not the
same thing. The roadmap is an entire reform plan covering all aspects of
English language education and all stages of education from preschool to
university. CEFR plays a big part in the reform, but it is not the reform plan
itself, nor is it any kind of plan. It is a framework of reference from which the
roadmap draws the best available ideas about language teaching and
learning.

Misconception #2: CEFR is an exam

CEFR is not an exam, but a framework which provides the basis for
measuring and describing language proficiency at different stages of
education, and which we are adopting for our schools and universities.
Beyond school, a number of major international exams, such as TOEFL and
IELTS, are already linked to CEFR, which means that scores from those
exams correspond to CEFR levels.

Misconception #3: CEFR is a type of English

There are several “Englishes” in the world such as British English, American
English, Jamaican English and Malaysian English which may differ in accent,
pronunciation, vocabulary and spelling. But there is no such thing as “CEFR
English”, “European English” or “International English”. CEFR merely
describes what learners can do with a language.

Misconception #4: Malaysian children’s proficiency will be evaluated

against native-speaker proficiency

Absolutely not. The “can do” statements describe a learner’s ability to

communicate in a foreign or second language. We want our children to use
English grammar correctly, acquire a good working vocabulary, speak
fluently, interact appropriately and produce comprehensible and intelligible
English. But they are NOT being measured against some native speaker or
“European” standard, which does not even exist. They are not expected to
sound like native speakers of English or achieve the same level of mastery,
especially in school.

The roadmap sets aspirational targets based on CEFR, as follows:

The target for graduates is B2 as this is the level at which they can expect to
get a job and function adequately in English. Graduates from TESL, English
language teacher education and English-related programmes are expected to
reach C1 by the time of graduation.
CEFR makes it possible to track student progress along a continuum from
preschool to university. It enables learners to compare their own
development along the CEFR scale, rather than against the performance of
other students. CEFR is also a guide for curriculum development, selecting
appropriate learning materials and developing assessments at the right level
for each stage of education.

The target for Form 5 school leavers is B1. At this level, they should be able
to understand the main points of input on familiar matters, cope with likely
situations as a tourist where English is spoken, produce simple connected
text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest, give a simple
description of experiences and events, talk about hopes and ambitions, and
briefly explain their opinions.

The target for university graduates is B2. At this level, they should be able to
understand more complex text, handle more abstract topics and technical
discussions, and interact comfortably with native speakers. The higher level
C1 is a requirement only for those who will go into specific careers, such as
English language teachers. These are minimum expectations. There will of
course be learners who excel and progress beyond the targets.

Zuraidah Mohd Don is chair of the English Language Standards and Quality
Council. Mardziah Hayati Abdullah is a council member.