CEFR Symposium 2013: Towards Language Education Transformation in Malaysia

2

CEFR SYMPOSIUM 2013 • TOWARDS LANGUAGE EDUCATION TRANSFORMATION IN MALAYSIA

1

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

T
Executive Summary

3

Presenters

4

KEYNOTE ADDRESS 1

6

KEYNOTE ADDRESS 2

8

PLENARY PRESENTATION 1

9


10


11


12

PARALLEL PRESENTATION 1

13


14


15


16

RESOLUTIONS

17

CONCLUSION

17

APPENDICES

18

THE RAPPORTEURING TEAM

he Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages (CEFR) was
developed by the Council of Europe in the
1970s at a time when there was growing interest
towards a communicative approach to language
teaching and the need for a common international
framework for language learning. Although, it was
initially developed for European nations, the CEFR
is now used in more than 39 countries worldwide.

education as there will be mutual recognition of
language qualifications.
The Malaysia Education Blueprint (2013-2025)
states that we should collectively aspire to
produce Malaysian students who are ‘operational
proficiency’ in English language. The CEFR
describes operational proficiency as “the linguistic
fluency that allows one to participate fully in
academic and professional life” which, in turn,
will enable young Malaysians to compete in a
globalised economy where English language is the
lingua franca.

19

The CEFR is known to help learners, teachers,
course designers, examining bodies and education
administrators to situate their own efforts within
a wider framework of reference that provides
greater unity to language instruction. Thus, it
provides greater coherence to language education
objectives, content and methods and instigates a
more learner-centred/communicative approach
to language teaching.
This action-oriented approach is coherent with
the aims of the Malaysian language curriculum
and, thus, can be easily adapted to suit the local
curricula. In addition, its use is also expected to
positively impact teacher training, classroom
pedagogy and assessment. Besides, a common
framework of reference will also create greater
international co-operation in the field of language

To create greater awareness of the CEFR, the
English Language Standards and Quality Council
and English Language Teaching Centre organised
a symposium with the theme Towards Language
Education Transformation in Malaysia on 29-30
October 2013 at Sama-Sama Hotel in KLIA, Sepang.
This report provides summaries of the two
keynote, four plenary and five parallel papers that
were presented, and highlights the five resolutions
that were tabled during the two-day historic
event.
Organising Committee
CEFR Symposium 2013

SYMPOSIUM DELEGATES
Organisation

Number

01 MOE divisions

27

02 Teacher Training Institutes

14

03 State Education Departments

26

04 Private Institutions

9

05 Universities

15

06 Presenters

9

07 ELSQC

11

08 Secretariat

19

TOTAL

2


130

3

PRESENTERS

PRESENTERS

Prof. Dr. Chan Swee Heng

Dr. Neil Jones

learning materials and tests for learners
of English as an Additional Language (EAL)
in Irish primary and post-primary schools.
Starting in 1998, he played a leading role
in the development and implementation
of the European Language Portfolio (ELP)
and co-ordinated the design of ELPs for
primary and post-primary learners of EAL,
post-primary and university learners of
foreign languages, and adult immigrants
to Ireland learning English for integration
and the workplace. He is a member of
the Council of Europe’s Working Group
on the Linguistic Integration of Adult
Migrants.

Chan Swee Heng is Professor
of Applied Linguistics at Universiti
Putra Malaysia. Her main interests are
in language testing and evaluation.
Currently, she is involved in several
research projects related to the
evaluation of soft skills in university
learning, meta-discourse use in writing,

the calibration of language vitality, and
the concerns of use of Malaysia’s heritage
language. She heads the testing centre
for UPM- ELTP (English Language Test
for Pilots). The test is endorsed by the
Department of Aviation, Malaysia, for the
evaluation of English language proficiency
needed in pilot licensing.

Dr. Neil Jones holds a PhD in Applied
Linguistics from the University of
Edinburgh on applying item response
theory. After teaching English in countries
including Poland and Japan, where he set
up and directed programmes at university
level, he joined Cambridge English in 1992.
He has led innovative developments
including item-banking and computeradaptive testing, and worked on the
construction and use of multilingual
proficiency
frameworks,
including
the Common European Framework

of Reference. He directed research
for Asset Languages, a 25-language
assessment system developed for the
UK government’s national languages
strategy, and most recently directed
the first European Survey on Language
Competences,
co-ordinated
by
Cambridge English Language Assessment
for the European Commission. His current
interest is Learning Oriented Assessment,
an approach which integrates all levels of
assessment to produce the most positive
learning outcomes.

Ang Chooi Kean, a master lecturer
(pensyarah cemerlang) from IPG Kampus
Bahasa Antrabangsa has been involved in
an intensive in-service teacher training
programme of Japanese language teachers
since 2005. She is currently pursuing her

Prof. Dr. David Little

David Little retired in 2008 as
Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics
and Head of the School of Linguistic,
Speech and Communication Sciences
at Trinity College Dublin. His principal
research interests, on which he has
published extensively, are: the theory and
practice of learner autonomy in second
language education; the exploitation
of linguistic diversity in schools and
classrooms; and the use of the Common
European Framework of Reference for
Languages (CEFR) to support the design of
second language curricula, teaching and
assessment. He has drawn on the CEFR to
develop curriculum guidelines, teaching/

doctorate degree at Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia. Among her current research
interests are self-monitoring skills,
learning awareness, e-learning, e-portfolio
and continuing professional development.

Ang Chooi Kean

4


Dr Greg Keaney

Azuar Abd. Rahman

Ho Lai Wan

through an application of Systemic
Functional Linguistics. She is a widely
published author of course materials for
English Language Teaching at primary
and secondary levels and has presented
widely at international conferences.
In addition to language teaching and
learning, Dr Aziz’s work also includes
materials for Maths education and she has
developed maths curriculum programs
that are used in more that 50 countries.

Greg is the Country Manager for CfBT
Education Services in Brunei Darussalam.
He combines a PhD in International
Education Management from Sydney
University and a Masters in Applied
Linguistics from Macquarie University
with over 25 years’ experience in the
management, administration and teaching
of English language in a wide variety of

contexts. He has published books (Talk
is Cheap, Never a Dull Moment ©CfBT),
TV programs (Power English ©Digimage),
DVDs (Magic Moments Series©CfBT
Media), radio shows (Kids Time, Story
Time © CfBT/RTB) and numerous articles
promoting a dynamic, interactive, learnercentred, evidence-based approach to
English language improvement.

Azuar Abd. Rahman is a German
Language lecturer at the IPG Kampus
Bahasa Antarabangsa (IPGKBA). She is
currently teaching students pursuing
a degree in German in the IPGKBAUniversiti Malaya twinning programme.
She is also the coordinator of the German
Practicum Programme in IPGKBA. She

has developed a passion for German
and is concerned with issues related to
the training of teachers to teach foreign
languages, She is currently conducting a
research to establish the beliefs that preservice and in service teachers hold about
foreign language learning.

Ho Lai Wan is a French Language
Lecturer at the Institut Pendidikan Guru,
Kampus Bahasa Antarabangsa, Kuala
Lumpur. She majored in the teaching of
French as a Foreign Language and the
Didactics of French. She is currently
involved in the training of French
Language teachers who will be placed in

Malaysian national schools which offer
French as a foreign language in their
school curriculum. To date, she has been
involved in the training of six cohorts
of students in helping them acquire
the language skills that is necessary for
integration in French universities.

Nguyen Ngoc Hung is Senior Advisor
of the Vietnam’s National Foreign
Languages 2020 Project undertaken by
the Ministry of Education and Training
(MOET). He had earlier served as
Executive Director of the project and
Deputy Director General in charge of

Dr Duriya Aziz

Dr Duriya Aziz is Vice President,
Education, Scholastic International. In this
role she is tasked with researching best
practices in teaching and learning and
incorporating them into the programs
developed by Scholastic to help children
round the world read and learn. She
completed her doctoral research at the
Leeds Metropolitan University in which
she developed a framework for the
evaluation of language teaching materials

international cooperation at MOET. He
is passionate about foreign language
development in Vietnam and hopes to
set up joint language programmes in the
ASEAN region.

Nguyen Ngoc Hung

5

Children, irrespective of
the culture they come from,
begin with a certain amount
of autonomy which they
can use in the classroom.
Hence, teachers need to
find ways to exploit the
autonomy they possess by
turning the classroom into
a domain of target language
communication.

KEYNOTE ADDRESS 1

THE COMMON EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK OF
REFERENCE FOR LANGUAGES: PURPOSE,
ORIGIN, ETHOS AND IMPLICATIONS


Language Policy Division, Council of Europe

The CEFR aims to support the implementation
of the Council of Europe’s language education
policy which recognises the need to intensify
language learning and teaching in member
countries, promote language learning as a
life-long task, facilitate cooperation among
educational institutions in different countries,
promote a sound basis for the mutual recognition
of language qualifications, assist learners,
teachers, course designers, examining bodies
and educational administrators to situate and
coordinate their efforts.
The framework can be viewed as an attempt to
characterise comprehensively, transparently and
coherently the act of language communication
in terms of what competent language users do
and the competences that enable them to act. It
is also a survey of methods of learning, teaching
and assessment and a scheme for establishing
common reference levels for specifying
communicative proficiency. Although the CEFR
does not advocate any particular teaching
approach, CEFR’s description of communicative
proficiency in terms of language use has powerful
pedagogical implications.
The framework’s action-oriented approach
in terms of its focus on language use brings
into focus the actions performed by language

6


users who as social agents develop a range of
communicative language competencies. Language
users thus draw on the competencies at their
disposal in various contexts, conditions and
constraints to produce and/or receive ‘texts’
in relation to themes in specific domains and
activate those strategies which seem most
appropriate for carrying out the task to be
accomplished.
In essence, human beings are constantly
engaged in language activities involving language
processes and the creation of ‘a community’
for the learners to be in will engage them in the
learning of a language. Furthermore, language
cannot be learnt in isolation. The CEFR proficiency
levels (refer to table) help in describing various
kinds of language users/learners.

A1 Can interact in a simple way
A2 Can cope with a basic range of language structures
B1 Can maintain sustained interaction
B2 Can engage in a sustained and effective argument
C1

Can communicate with a broad range of language
structures

C2 Can communicate with a high degree of precision

There is, however, no clear-cut method of
teaching learners to move them from one level to
another. The learners bring with them knowledge
of the world, and have to be given some
autonomy to take charge of their own learning.
This is based on the understanding that further
learning has to be autonomous once the learners
leave the classroom. Autonomous learning can
be promoted if learning to learn is regarded as an
integral part of language learning. In other words,
to develop language proficiency, learners need to
become independent.
Children, irrespective of the culture they
come from, begin with a certain amount of
autonomy which they can use in the classroom.
Hence, teachers need to find ways to exploit the
autonomy they possess by turning the classroom
into a domain of target language communication.

The key challenge in language education is
to make the process of language learning more
democratic by providing the conceptual tools
for the planning, construction and conduct of
courses closely geared to the needs, motivations
and characteristics of the learners and enabling
them as far as possible to steer and control
their own progress. The ‘can do’ statements can
provide specific learning targets and lead to
democratic ways of developing learning activities
and materials for students. Hence, teachers should
continuously find ways to engage them in the
learning process. In short, CEFR places importance
on the creation of learner autonomy and the
creation of a community of learning in the target
language.

The CEFR brings pedagogy and assessment, as
well as pedagogy and curricula into the closest
ever relationships possible. However, it is wrong
to assume that curricula dictate pedagogy and
assessment; they, in fact, affect one another.
In CEFR curricula, pedagogy and assessment
collaborate instead of one preceding the other.
Traditionally, teaching precedes learning and
assessment.

7

KEYNOTE ADDRESS 2

CEFR: ITS RELEVANCE IN LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS IN MALAYSIAN PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES

Prof. Dr. Chan Swee Heng
PUTTING THE CEFR TO WORK: THE IRISH
EXPERIENCE


Language Policy Division, Council of Europe

The CEFR’s most innovative feature is
the action-orientated approach it brings to
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. The
descriptors in the scale have the capacity to
align learning activities and assessment and bring
them into a more coherent relationship with one
another.
This quality is best exemplified via the Irish
experience when there was a sizeable proportion
of migrant children in primary schools in the
late nineties. This posed a challenge to primary
schools: how does one deal with children whose
home language is not English or Irish?
In response to the problem, Integrate Ireland
Language and Training (IILT) programme was
conducted from 1999 to 2008. Consequently, an
ESL curriculum framework that integrated the
need for extensive ESL support was developed.
Teachers found the curriculum effective as there
was a logical and coherent sense of progression
in the acquisition of language skills. Furthermore,
it provided avenues for the development of
learner autonomy and communicative methods of
teaching.

8


The CEFR scales were adapted to suit the
context where English is used as the medium
of instruction. A decision was made to use only
the first three reference levels i.e. A1, A2 and B1.
The voluminous Irish primary curriculum was
translated into 13 recurrent themes with the first 3
levels of CEFR self-assessment adjusted to an ageappropriate grid.

E

nglish was used dominantly in Malaysia till
the National Language Act (1967) when a
change in the medium of instruction (from
English to Bahasa Melayu) was made, which had an
effect on the instructional language used in public
universities.
The policy to teach Mathematics and Science
in English (2002) encouraged universities to
change their medium of instruction as well in
science and technology courses. However, the
policy was officially reversed in 2012.
The recently launched Malaysia Education
Blueprint (2013-2025) encourages Plurilingualism
and explicitly states that CEFR scales can be used
as benchmarks for language proficiency. English is
to be made a compulsory subject to pass in SPM
from 2016 and every student is encouraged to
learn an additional language.

The European Language Portfolio that has
three components, namely, the language passport,
biography and Dossier was also used. This was
helpful in providing pedagogical support and
reporting in the Irish primary school context.
As anticipated, the teachers quickly understood
and used the documents to assess student
learning with relative ease. The language passport
consisting of “I can” (can-do statements) checklist
was used to plan and monitor learning.

Students who enter universities must
have taken the Malaysian University Entrance
Examination (MUET). The MUET grades are flexibly
used as they are merely indicative of levels of
ability of academic English. The usage of MUET
as a placement criterion depends on universities.
Universities also have language proficiency units
or centres that organise English language courses
for students. In addition, the use of English in
teaching and learning is continuously encouraged.

On the whole, research findings indicate
that the migrant pupils developed functional
competence as defined in the English Language
Proficiency Benchmarks and CEFR.

An exploratory study to investigate the
opinion of university lecturers regarding the
relevance of CEFR in their language teaching
contexts indicates that the majority of the
respondents have little familiarity with CEFR. The
study also reveals that 28 % of the respondents
believe that the CEFR is now implemented not
only in Europe but also all around the world.
26% of the sample believed that standardisation
and harmonisation mean less flexibility and less
diversity in language programmes. Sixty-five per

cent of the respondents were in agreement that
their institutes should promote the use of the
CEFR or other common reference levels.
The study identified the following as benefits
of the CEFR:

• Mutual recognition of competences to improve
mobility and employment prospects
• Lifelong participation in an international society
• Accountability and achievement of political goals
• Incentive for funding especially for schools linked to
achievement of standards
• Enhancement of professionalism in language
teaching and testing
• Ability to appreciate international standards set on a
global scale
• Flexibility in description of language skills
The study also identified three factors as
possible constraints:

• Lack of empirical basis in support of such
standardisation
• Need for complex decisions on curricular planning
and assessment
• Negative backwash: teachers may teach to the test
• Heavy emphasis on monitoring and compliance with
regulations that may lead to the sacrifice of actual
learning
Based on the study, it can be concluded that
the prospect of implementing the use of CEFR
in universities is promising but adopting the
framework will pose a great challenge in terms of
ownership and local validation issues.

9



CEFR AND ITS IMPACT ON CLASSROOM PEDAGOGY

WHAT THE EUROPEAN SURVEY ON LANGUAGE COMPETENCES TELLS US ABOUT SUCCESSFUL LANGUAGE LEARNING

Dr. Greg Keaney

Dr. Neil Jones

I

n planning the improvement of the education
system, one needs to think in terms of every
student, every teacher and every teaching
moment. For 21st century success, English is
an essential requirement and the challenge is
establishing effective ways to make students
proficient in the language.
Student self-assessment enables students to
evaluate their own strengths and weaknesses.
Similarly, collaborative learning also makes
students aware of their strengths and weaknesses.
Every student cannot be treated the same and
every student can be made to improve using
different practices that suit them best. In this
respect, CEFR allows students to recognise their
strengths and know which level they are at. It also
allows students to realise that they are in charge
of their own learning.
Assessment is a tool for improvement and not
a measurement of what the learner cannot do.
It tells learners what they are weak in and what
they need to improve on. In relation to this, CEFR
provides a viable framework to address specific
needs of learners. Every assessment activity
should help the learner learn; I want to know, am I
doing well?
Moreover CEFR is a prebuilt framework
for assessment that teachers can use to make
informed decisions on resources and input to be
used in the classroom.
CEFR is concerned about positive feedback;
negative feedback through repetitive correction
can be detrimental. The CEFR, on the other hand,
is concerned with the description of ‘can do’
statements. This type of feedback improves the
self-esteem of the students and motivates them
to learn the language.
Language learning is largely about learning to
speak. However, many school systems overvalue

10


reading and writing. For students to be more
proficient there is a need for more conversations
and use of the language in the classroom. The use
of CEFR which focuses on language in use will
necessarily bring greater focus on the teaching of
all the four skills.
Overall, the CEFR provides a framework for
assisting classroom teachers of English to link
student performance and outcomes to meaningful
and reliable international criteria. Tasks and
interaction, which are at the heart of effective
English language teaching, are also at the centre
of the CEFR, making it a wonderfully supportive
framework for the assessment of effective
teaching and learning. However, it is important
to remember that teachers’ professional wisdom
and a good amount of ‘plain old common sense’
are still required to get the most out of the
framework and to use it to support the language
learning and progress of all students in Malaysia.

A

study on second and foreign language
competences was conducted in Europe in
November 2011 to establish the progress
made in “improving the mastery of basic skills,
in particular by teaching at least two foreign
languages from a very early age.” The study was
also conducted to establish the general level of
foreign language knowledge of the students and
obtain strategic information for policy makers.
The following conclusions were made after the
study:

• There must be an early start to language learning.
• Language learning is most effective when there is a
language friendly environment.
• Language proficiency relates positively to students’
perception of their parents’ knowledge of that
language, and their exposure to and use of the
language through traditional and new media.
• Attitudes make a difference: students who find
learning the language useful tend to achieve higher
levels of proficiency.
• Greater use of the foreign language in lessons by
both teachers and students relates positively to
proficiency.
The questionnaire findings could be summed
up as follows:
A language is learned better where motivation
is high, where learners perceive it to be useful,
and where it is indeed used outside school, for
example in communicating over the internet, for
watching TV, or travelling on holiday. Also, the
more teachers and students use the language in
class, the better it is learned.
Languages are learned “for communication by
communicating.” Thus, the goal and the method
of language teaching must come together.
Therefore, it can be safely assumed that teachers
can succeed with any language if they can find
ways of teaching it for and by communication.
However, as Karl Marx pointed out “the point

is not merely to understand the world, but to
change it.” Hence, the following proposals were
made based on the findings: there must be topdown management and control of language
learning development plans and continuous
professional development efforts must be taken
to improve teaching and learning practices.
Accordingly,
some
assessment-based
groups began to implement better operational
approaches to assessment, to conduct research
and develop new assessment tools based on the
principles of CEFR. Subsequently, it was noted
that there was a notable interest in language
education reform. The CEFR proficiency scales
provide understandable data and assist the item
builders write test items based on the descriptors
at each level.
The CEFR levels were not formulated
haphazardly but they emerged in a gradual,
collective recognition of ‘natural levels’ available
to the language user. These ‘concepts’ were first
described as a possible set of ‘Council of Europe
levels’ by David Wilkins in 1977. There is also
empirical evidence that self-evaluation reports
can be accurately linked to the examination
grades that use CEFR scales as the guiding
principles.
The central principle of the CEFR is the
recognition of language use: learners use language
and complete a task by performing an activity in
order to learn the language. In CEFR, tasks that
reflect real world situations are given central
prominence. Performance in such tasks can allow
us to make interpretations of their reactions in
the real world. Learning Oriented Assessments
(LOA) should also be prioritised as they provide
evidence of (and for) learning. Data (evidence)
obtained through LOA can be utilized to plan
individualised learning strategies that empower
learners to manage their own learning. Basically
LOA’s primary concern is to gain evidence to
promote further learning instead of simply
measuring it.

11



ALIGNING TEACHING AND LEARNING MATERIALS TO SUIT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PROFICIENCY:
CALIBRATING AGAINST CEFR

Dr. Duriya Aziz

T

here are many factors involved in
the process of developing effective
instructional materials according to
CEFR levels. Firstly, there must be clarity in
the objectives for language learning set by the
stakeholders before course materials can be
developed effectively. Basically, course materials
must be coherent and meaningful to the languagelearning aims and objectives.
Material developers must also consider the
ability of the teachers to use their materials with
relative ease in different teaching and learning
contexts. They must also be clear about the
purpose of their materials; whether it is used just
to teach the language or to teach the teacher how
to teach the language. More importantly, language
resources must provide adequate scaffolding
activities to ensure adequate support for the
learner to achieve particular skills.
The age factor, the children’s starting point,
home environment and their mental schema
of language also play a major part in language
learning. Hence, material developers may need to
develop their materials accordingly in anticipation
of their target users. This, however, may not be
easy if the materials are developed for learners
in an entire country, for example. The other
factors to be considered are the context of use,
number of hours of exposure and the levels of
English used. All these must be considered and are
important in the effort to align materials to the
CEFR.
A close look at the CEFR will reveal that
language competencies are assigned to specific
levels. However, in reality, communication
requires multiple competencies which may easily

12


...language resources
must provide adequate
scaffolding activities to
ensure adequate support
for the learner to achieve
particular skills.

fit to any one level. It must be remembered that
language is a social act and the competencies do
not occur in a linear fashion. There is also concern
that teachers classify their students too early
according to the CEFR levels of competencies,
which is contradictory to the intent of this
framework. Therefore teachers using the
framework must exercise caution not to oversimplify the competencies. Since language is used
to serve particular functions, teaching and learning
materials must ideally reflect language use.
Adapting the CEFR to transform language
learning is viable. However, appropriate cultural
alignment must be made to contextualise the
teaching and learning materials to suit the
context. It is, therefore important for users of the
CEFR to ‘use it and own it’ by adding, excluding
and interpreting the competencies based on their
local contexts (in reference to the objectives,
aspirations and intended learning outcomes).

PREPARING TEACHER TRAINEES FOR A B2 CEFR SCALE IN DEUTSCH: A MALAYSIAN EXPERIENCE

Azuar Abd. Rahman

T

he German language classes conducted
in Institut Pendidikan Kampus Bahasa
Antarabangsa (IPGKBA) are taught during
the two-year foundation programme of the
Bachelor of Languages and Linguistics (German)
with Education which the students will pursue in
Universiti Malaya.
In order to be eligible for entry into the
degree programme in UM, students need to
acquire at least a B2 (CEFR) level pass in the final
exam administered by Goethe Institute. This
poses a great challenge to the German language
instructors in IPGKBA.

It is viable to use the CEFR as a benchmark but
achieving the levels can be difficult if there are
no opportunities for language learners to use the
language outside the classroom. Students also
tend to be influenced by their knowledge of other
languages. Although encouraging the students
to read widely may help in their acquisition of
German, it will not necessarily help them carry
out language tasks as indicated in the ‘can do’
descriptors of the CEFR levels. Getting native
speakers to teach the language has also proven to
be effective.

To help the students, the learning hours were
extended and the lessons were aligned to the
learning outcomes stipulated in Goethe Institute’s
B2 level. Additionally, books that were aligned
to B1 and B2 scales were used in the classroom.
Students were also encouraged to use Goethe
Institute’s website which offered them online
learning opportunities. Mock examinations were
also administered to the students.
Although all the efforts helped the students
considerably, there were problems that needed
to be addressed. For example, students found it
difficult to comprehend non-standard (vernacular)
German used in some listening texts provided
by Goethe Institute. The students’ speech was
robotic, not spontaneous, and showed signs
of inappropriate idiom use. The students were
unable to express opinions or arguments in their
essays. In addition, the emphasis on preparing
students for a B2 in the final examination had
shifted the focus of the instructors to getting
the students to obtain a B2 proficiency level
and passing the Goethe-Zertifikat B2 rather than
conducting effective communicative language
tasks.

It is viable to use the
CEFR as a benchmark
but achieving the levels
can be difficult if there
are no opportunities for
language learners to use
the language outside the
classroom.

13



THE CEFR AND THE SETTING OF REALISTIC PROFICIENCY TARGETS FOR INTEGRATION IN UNIVERSITE
DE FRANCHE COMTE

UTILIZATION OF “CAN DO” STATEMENTS IN JAPANESE LANGUAGE EDUCATION IN MALAYSIA – THE
EXPERIENCES OF A LOCAL JAPANESE LANGUAGE TEACHER

Ho Lai Wan

Ang Chooi Kean

T

he CERF has been used since 2005 in the
teaching of French to students who start off
with an A2 level at Institut Pendidikan Guru
Kampus Bahasa Antarabangsa’s French foundation
course. At this level, the students who will
eventually pursue a degree in French at Universite
de Franche - Comte are still in the discovery stage
of their language-learning journey.
The emphasis is on the four language
competencies (listening, speaking, reading &
writing) taught via a communicative approach
as agreed by the Council of Europe in 2005. The
entry level proficiency target has been set at
B2, which will enable the students to integrate
easily at the university and with society at large.
The French Embassy in Malaysia provides the
services of native speakers to help in teaching and
monitoring the students’ progress.
The pass in the compulsory examination (DELF)
which is pitched at the B2 level is a prerequisite
for entry into universities in France. The
recommended contact time to enable students to
get through this level is between 400-500 hours.

Thus far, all students who have undergone the
foundation programme have successfully passed
the DELF. In line with the principles of the CEFR,
most of the activities provided to the students are
task-based activities and projects which provide
simulated real-world communication.
Students also have to conduct self-assessment
via given checklists but are also assessed by their
peers and teachers. They are also evaluated via a
learning portfolio which they are required to keep.
To pass the CEFR, students should score at least
50% of the total marks.
Aligning teaching methodology to fit the
requirements of a B2 entry criterion has helped
students pass the DELF. More importantly,
students assimilate and integrate well in the local
setting.

T

he CEFR is known as CDS or ‘can do’
statements in Japan and is widely used in
teaching Japanese language to foreigners in
Japan including in-service teachers who are sent
to pursue Master degrees in Japan.
In Malaysia, Japanese is mostly taught in
residential schools and Japanese language
teachers have been trained via a specially
designed in-service programme since 2005. The
training, which is conducted with the assistance
of Japan Foundation, Kuala Lumpur, comprises
three main parts: a 12-week preparatory course, a
one-year Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language
course and a 12-month internship stint.
Since 2008, trainees have also been required
to keep 3 portfolios: a cultural portfolio, teaching
portfolio, and a learning portfolio.
There have been two main challenges in the
training of Japanese teachers, namely:

enhancing learning awareness and self-monitoring
skills among course participants. It made them
aware of what they can do to go on learning the
language. However, there is stil a lack of depth in
the writing of reflections. The trainees, generally,
seem to be vague about their achievements and
are often subjective in their self-assessment.
There are also gaps in the knowledge and skills
among the teaching staff. Although the CDS lists
are available for use, teachers are still teaching
the way they were taught. Therefore, there must
be a process of unlearning before new training is
provided. In addition, the CDS lists should have
been incorporated or integrated into the course
curriculum and emphasised as learning outcomes
in the training of the teachers. Assessments of the
trainees should also be planned based on the CDS
lists.

• Inadequate time-frame to develop self-directedness
in learning a language after training and teaching
• Difficulty in teaching Japanese language
competency as there was a heavy reliance on
textbooks
To improve the training, the Japan Foundation
proposed that a checklist of ‘can do’ statements
(CDS) is utilised. The three portfolios are also to
be merged and only one portfolio labelled as the
professional portfolio is to be produced by the
trainees. The CDS lists were revised accordingly
by the lecturers in charge of the specific language
skills. They were divided into four levels:
advanced, intermediate, basic, and essential.
The learning portfolio based on the CDS lists
as learning support played a big role in slightly

14


15


RESOLUTIONS

CHALLENGES, OPPORTUNITIES AND SOLUTIONS: VIETNAM’S CEFR EXPERIENCE

Nguyen Ngoc Hung

I

n 2004 Vietnam was accepted as a member of
the World Trade Organisation. Subsequently,
investments poured into the country. For
example, Intel invested 1 billion dollars while
Taiwanese companies brought in investments
worth 5 billion dollars. Foreign investments
created job opportunities for locals. However,
some jobs required operational-level English
language proficiency which many local graduates
did not possess.
With the Asean Free Trade Zone (AFTA) set
to take place in 2015, there is a greater need
for a workforce which has English language
proficiency. Hence, the government via the
Ministry of Education and Training (MOET)
initiated the National Foreign Language 2020
project (NFL). The project hopes to produce
students graduating from secondary schools,
vocational schools, colleges and universities
who can use a foreign language confidently in
their daily communication, their study and work
in an integrated, multicultural and multilingual
environment. The NFL received strong support
from all sectors including the general public.
At the time the NFL was initiated, there
were no common proficiency standards and
benchmarks for language teaching and learning
in Vietnam. Foreign languages were taught
as subjects at school and not as a means of
communication.
After making comparisons of various American
and European language frameworks, the CEFR was
chosen for the following reasons:

• It is user-friendly
• It allows for a functional, task-oriented approach to
language teaching

16


There were four “Special Interest Group” discussions on the second day of the symposium, with each
group focusing on different areas namely: tertiary education, teacher training, assessment and classroom
pedagogy. At the end of the session, the following resolutions were tabled:

• It has been adopted not only in Europe but in Asia
(Japan, China) as well
• It has a desirable impact on curriculum, syllabus,
teaching, learning and evaluation
• It can be used for the “mutual recognition” of
language qualifications with other countries
• It has the capacity to motivate students through the
“CAN DO” statements and checklists
• It promotes democracy and accountability in
education as the learners can reflect on their own
language tasks and performances
The school language curriculum was matched
to CEFR with an A1 target set for primary school
pupils, A2 for secondary school students and
B1 for high schools. Graduates from teacher
training colleges and universities must have a
B2 level while graduates who will teach English
in high schools and universities must obtain a
C1. The general target which is B2 is based on
the Canadian Employability Skills (2000) report
which claims that a B2 level is good enough for
graduates to function well in employment.
In addition, the National Foreign Language
Testing Centre was established at MOET, and item
builders, as well as oral and written examiners
were trained, in cooperation with Cambridge
ESOL and other partners in the Asia-Pacific region.
In Europe before the European Union, a
common framework for languages was developed.
South East Asia (ASEAN) needs its own language
framework in view of the AFTA 2015. A common
language framework will also allow for the
regional recognition of certification, cooperation
in teacher training, and digital resource
development.

TEACHER TRAINING

ASSESSMENT

1

2

3

4

5

The CEFR
should be used
as a point of
reference
to develop
a national
framework
to transform
language
education in
Malaysia.

School-based
assessments
should reflect
language
performance
in real world
situations in
tandem with
the central
philosophy of
CEFR.

Current
summative
assessment
scores/grades
should be
aligned to an
internationally
recognised
framework
for mutual
recognition
of language
qualifications.

A common
framework
for language
education that
focuses on
‘language in
use’ should
be utilised
to enhance
classroom
pedagogy and
strengthen
the delivery of
lessons.

Teacher
education
should focus
on developing
language
competencies
that will enable
language
teachers
to develop
students’
communicative
competence.

TERTIARY EDUCATION

CLASSROOM PEDAGOGY

17

APPENDICES
COMMON REFERENCE LEVELS: GLOBAL SCALE

C2.

Just as a forest is inside a seed...

A common framework for
curriculum, learning and teaching
and the assessment of English
from preschool to university level
is needed to benchmark English
language proficiency of our
students. Of all the frameworks
currently available, the CEFR would
appear to be the most suitable for
this purpose as it is theoretically
grounded and comprehensive, yet
flexible and open to adaptation to
the local setting.

B2.

A2.

Can understand with ease
virtually everything heard or
read. Can summarise information
from different spoken and
written sources, reconstructing
arguments and accounts in
a
coherent
presentation.
Can
express
him/herself
spontaneously, very fluently and
precisely, differentiating finer
shades of meaning even in more
complex situations.

Can understand the main
ideas of complex text on both
concrete and abstract topics,
including technical discussions
in his/her field of specialisation.
Can interact with a degree of
fluency and spontaneity that
makes regular interaction with
native speakers quite possible
without strain for either party.
Can produce clear, detailed text
on a wide range of subjects and
explain a viewpoint on a topical
issue giving the advantages and
disadvantages of various options.

Can understand sentences
and frequently used expressions
related to areas of most
immediate
relevance
(e.g.
very basic personal and family
information, shopping, local
geography,
employment).
Can communicate in simple
and routine tasks requiring a
simple and 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 basic need.

C1.

B1.

A1.

Can understand a wide range
of demanding, longer texts, and
recognise implicit meaning. Can
express him/herself fluently
and spontaneously without
much obvious searching for
expressions. Can use language
flexibly and effectively for social,
academic
and
professional
purposes. Can produce clear,
well-structured, detailed text
on complex subjects, showing
controlled use of organisational
patterns,
connectors
and
cohesive devices.

Can understand the main
points of clear standard input
on familiar matters regularly
encountered in work, school,
leisure, etc. Can deal with most
situations likely to arise whilst
travelling in an area where the
language is spoken. Can produce
simple connected text on
topics which are familiar or of
personal interest. Can describe
experiences and events, dreams,
hopes and ambitions and briefly
give reasons and explanations for
opinions and plans.

Can understand and use
familiar everyday expressions
and very basic phrases aimed
at the satisfaction of needs of
a concrete type. Can introduce
him/herself and others and
can ask and answer questions
about personal details such
as where he/she lives, people
he/she knows and things he/
she has. Can interact in a simple
way provided the other person
talks slowly and clearly and is
prepared to help.

USEFUL WEBSITES ON CEFR
The following websites provide information on proficiencies and assessment kits:
www.coe.int/lang
www.coe.int/portfolio
www.ncca.ie/iilt

18


19

THE RAPPORTEURING TEAM
MS. LEELA JAMES DASS
Team Leader

MS. VILOSHINI BASKARAN
Assistant Team Leader

MS. CH’NG BEE EE
MR. THIRRUMURTHY
MS. NORHAKIMAH KHAIESSA AHMAD
MS. NORZALINA ABDUL RASHID
MS. WONG KWAI CHENG
MS. T. PARIMALA
DR. S. JAYANTHI

THE EDITORIAL TEAM
MS. FADZILAH AMIN
DR. SIVABALA NAIDU
DR. SURAYA SULYMAN
MS. SARINA SALIM
MS. NOOR AZMIRA AMRAN

20


21

22


CEFR Symposium 2013: Towards Language Education Transformation in Malaysia

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Mehr von Sivabala Naidu

Mehr von Sivabala Naidu (9)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

CEFR Symposium 2013: Towards Language Education Transformation in Malaysia